UK FILM COUNCIL

UK Film Council
10 Little Portland Street
London W1W 7JG
T +44 (0)20 7861 7861
F +44 (0)20 7861 7862
This Statistical Yearbook
is available online atwww.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk

WRAP”

STATISTICAL YEARBOOK 2006/07“IT’S ASTATISTICAL YEARBOOK
2006/07“AND

ACTION”

Introduction
Executive summary

02
05

1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4

The box office
Admissions
Box office earnings
Film releases and box office revenues
Country of origin of film releases

10
12
16
16
18

2
2.1
2.2
2.3

Top films in 2006
The top 20 films
The top 20 UK films
Best weekend performances of UK films

22
24
25
26

3
3.1
3.2

Top films 1997–2006
Top films in the UK, 1997–2006
Top UK films of the last decade

28
30
31

4
4.1
4.2
4.3

UK films internationally
UK films worldwide
UK films in North America
UK films in Europe

32
34
35
36

5
5.1
5.2
5.3

UK talent and the global box office
UK story material
UK actors
UK directors

38
40
43
44

Release history of UK films
UK films released in the UK
and the Republic of Ireland
6.1.1 Types of certification:
Schedule 1 and co-production
6.1.2 UK majority and minority co-productions
6.1.3 Independent and studio films
6.2 UK films released internationally
6.2.1 Types of certification:
Schedule 1 and co-production
6.2.2 UK majority and minority co-productions
6.2.3 Independent and studio films
6.3 Release opportunities analysis
6.3.1 Types of certification:
Schedule 1 and co-production
6.3.2 UK majority and minority co-productions
6.3.3 Independent and studio films
6.4 Financial success analysis

46

7
7.1
7.2
7.3

Language, genre and classification
Foreign language films
GenreClassification

58
60
64
68

8
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4

Distribution
Distributors in 2006
Distributors, 2002–2006
Weekend box office
Release costs

72
74
75
76
77

Exhibition
UK screens
Screen location
Multiplexes
Programming
Exhibitors
Exhibitor revenues
Digital projection
Community cinema provisionin the UK, 2006
9.8.1 BFFS membership survey
9.8.2 Community cinema provision

78
80
81
84
86
88
89
89

6
6.1

9
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
9.5
9.6
9.7
9.8

48
49
50
50
51
52
53
54
54
55
56
56
57

90
91
92

Audiences
96
10
10.1 Cinema audience by gender98
98
10.2 Film preferences by gender100
10.3 Cinema audience by age
10.4 Film preferences by age
100
10.5 Cinema audience by social group104
10.6 Film preferences by social group104
10.7 Film audiences by ethnicity
105
10.8 Film audiences by disability
107
10.9 Film preferences by region
107
10.10 Film download and digital piracy by age 109
10.11 Comparative profiles of cinema audiences
and audiences for film on television110
10.12 Frequency by age of cinema-goers
watching and buying DVDs, going to thecinema and watching television
110
11
11.1
11.2
11.3

Film on DVD
Film in the video rental market
Film in the retail video market
Hardware

112
114
116
116

12
12.1
12.2
12.3
12.4
12.5

Film on UK television
118
Programming
120
Peak time
121
Audiences for film on network television 122
Films on multi-channel television
124
The audience for film on
television, 1997–2006
127
12.6 The value of feature film to broadcasters 128
13
The UK film market as a whole13013.1 The UK filmed entertainment market
as a whole132
13.2 The UK market in the global context
132
13.3 The evolution of UK film revenues,
1998–2006
133
13.4 The impact of other digital
135
leisure activities
13.5 Has the fall in the length of the theatrical
135
window reduced cinema admissions?
13.6 The impact of film piracy
136

Film production
1414.1 The value of UK production in 2006
14.2 Inward, domestic and UK co-production
features, 1992–2006
14.3 Budget trends
14.4 Size distribution of budgets
14.5 Big-budget productions, 2002–2006
14.6 UK share of expenditure14.7 UK co-productions by country of shoot14.8 Production company activity levels
14.9 US studios’ involvement ininward features
14.10 The new UK film tax incentive

138
140

15
Film industry companies
15.1 Number of companies in the film
and video industries
15.2 Changing size distribution offilm companies
15.3 Leading film companies in the
UK and Europe
15.4 Leading film production companies
in the UK and Europe

150

16
16.1
16.2
16.3
16.4
16.5

160
162
162
163
163

UK film exports
UK film exports, 1995–2005
UK film imports, 1995–2005
The UK film trade balance, 1995–2005
UK film export markets
UK film exports compared with theglobal market for filmed entertainment
16.6 The geographical distribution of the
UK’s film trade surplus
17
17.1
17.2
17.3
17.4

141
144
144
146
146
146
148
149
149

152
152
155
157

164
165

Employment in the film andvideo industries
The workforce
The film production workforce survey
The workplace location
The scale of the workplace

166
168
170
174
175

Glossary
Acknowledgements
Sources

178
180
180

Introduction
2006: The year in review
2006 was a year in which online and mobile
consumption of audio-visual entertainment began tomake an impact on film, but not yet in a way thatfilm could compete on an equal footing with music,
user-generated content and social networking. The UK
is a huge consumer of film, but the initial effect of thelatest digital revolution has been to compress rather
than expand film audiences. The evidence and reasonsfor this are examined in this Yearbook – in particular,
in Chapters 1 (Box office), 11 (Film on DVD), 12 (Filmon television) and 13 (The film market as a whole).
In short, audiences are racing into the new digitalentertainment arena while the film industry struggles
to overcome barriers such as slow download speeds,
unresolved rights and security issues, and undeveloped
platforms. In a few years, these will be overcome,but in the meantime a proportion of consumer timeand money has migrated away from film and into
the expanding world of opportunity offered by theinternet and its associated devices.
How big is the audience for film in the UK?
While most media attention is paid to the cinema
release of films, it is via television (Chapter 12) thatpeople watch most of the films they see. In the UK in
2006, the total audience for film on television was a
staggering 3.3 billion, 21 times larger than the cinema
audience and three or four times larger than theaudience for DVD/video.
The top film on TV in 2006 was Pirates of the
Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl which drewa BBC1 audience of 9.5 million, approximately
one-sixth of the entire UK population. Its success wasdue in part to the wealth of British actors appearing in
the film including Keira Knightley, Orlando Bloom,
Jack Davenport, Jonathan Pryce and Mackenzie Crookand the American actor Johnny Depp playing a
British character and modelling his performanceon a member of the Rolling Stones.
British films attract around one-fifth of the television
film audience – about 660 million viewing occasions,that is about 10 per person per year. Of those viewing
occasions, roughly one-quarter are for recent UK films(UK films theatrically released within the last eight
years), suggesting that the Government’s investment
in UK film reaps a substantial dividend in terms ofaudience enjoyment.

2 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Who watches films in the UK?
The majority of the theatrical audience is young(nearly half under the age of 25), but the older
audience (people aged 45 and over) has grown
substantially over the last decade – from 19 million to
38 million and from 14% to 24% of the total theatricalaudience. Growth in the older audience seems to havebeen driven both by the ageing of the population andby the wider choice of films on offer. The number oftheatrical releases increased from 327 in 1998 to
505 in 2006. And Chapter 1 notes a significant trend:
that the plateau in cinema admissions is confined tothe top 50 titles, while box office takings for films
ranked 51–150 and 151 onwards have continued
to grow strongly.
The television audience for film has a much older profile:
only 16% under the age of 25 and 56% over the ageof 45, reflecting the preference of the older age
groups for home-based audio-visual entertainment.
The film audience is diverse. It is roughly 50/50
male and female and minority ethnic groups arewell represented (Chapter 10). As one would expect,
the audience for individual films varies widely,depending on the genre and type of film and thelocation of the cinema. Disabled people haveproportionate access to retail DVD/video but
are under-represented in cinema access andDVD/video rental.
A small, but growing, part of the audience enjoys
foreign language films, of which there were 171
releases in 2006 in 29 languages, taking 3.5% of thebox office. Hindi was the most common foreign
language in terms of number of releases, followed
by French, Tamil and Spanish. The top four foreign
language films in 2006 were Volver (Spain), Pan’s
Labyrinth (Mexico/Spain/USA), Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna(India) and Hidden (France). Foreign language films
were popular with film societies, of which there were
nearly 300 in the UK in 2006. While the total
attendance at film society screenings was only 116,000(Chapter 9), film societies plug a gap in cinema
provision for film enthusiasts and are often located inrural or remote rural locations.
At this stage, the audience most attracted to
new digital entertainment is young people and,as reported in Chapter 13, there is evidence of a shift
from DVD/video towards internet use among
15–24 year olds.

This also emerges from research into film theft(Chapter 13) which indicates a surge in downloading/burning, predominantly in the 15–34 age group.
The only factors holding many people back fromdownloading are not knowing how to do it or findingit ‘too much effort’, responses that do not augur wellfor containing online film theft when technology andskills improve.
One potential culprit for the plateau in cinema
admissions is the shorter gap between a film’s
debut in the cinema and its release on DVD/video
but research reported in Chapter 13 suggests that
this has not, as yet, been the cause of reduced box
office takings.
Audiences continue to enjoy UK films
As reported last year, 2005 was a record year for UK
films, which took one-third of the box office. The 2006
performance was not quite as strong – UK films took
19% of the box office – but the year finished on a highnote with the latest Bond film, Casino Royale, topping
the charts with takings of £55.5 million (Chapter 2).
The end of the year also saw the critical and award
successes for The Queen (director Stephen Frears,
starring Helen Mirren) and The Last King of Scotland(director Kevin Macdonald, starring Forest Whitakerand supported by the UK Film Council).
Earlier in 2006, two other UK films, Ken Loach’s The
Wind that Shakes the Barley and Andrea Arnold’s Red
Road (both supported by the UK Film Council) took
the two top prizes at the Cannes Film Festival.
On network television, the top three UK films in2006 were Calendar Girls (8 million viewers),
Mrs Henderson Presents (7 million viewers) andLove Actually (5.5 million viewers).
Taking UK film to the world
UK films were once again seen by huge audiences
around the world. The UK film share of global
cinema takings was 8.5%, or US$2.2 billion, equal toapproximately 500 million admissions (Chapter 4).
The new Bond film with Daniel Craig, Casino Royale,thrilled audiences across the world, sparking television
coverage and feature articles on ’Britishness’ fromSouth Africa to South America to South Korea.
International audiences also enjoyed relationshipdramas such as Notes on a Scandal and Venus, thedynastic political films The Queen and The Last Kingof Scotland, Paul Greengrass’s evocation of 9/11,
United 93 and Aardman Animation’s children’s film,
Flushed Away.

The international reach of UK film was confirmed by
the latest (2005) trade figures released by the Office for
National Statistics, showing a jump in UK film exports
to £967 million, contributing a trade surplus of£163 million to the UK’s balance of payments(Chapter 16).
Two-thirds of the export income came from royalties
and one-third from the export of production services,a figure likely to increase in 2006 due to the recovery
of inward investment into UK film production (Chapter
14). Inward investment – into films such as Casino
Royale, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix,
His Dark Materials: The Golden Compass, The Bourne
Ultimatum – jumped in 2006 to £570 million as
uncertainty over the UK’s film tax regime abated.
The Government put in place a new tax relief for
culturally British film which came into force on
1 January 2007, while transitional provisions covered
films already in production in 2006.
2006 also saw the production of 50 domestic
features (including Mr Bean’s Holiday and Hot Fuzz,
the 2007 box office leaders at the time of writing)and 57 co-productions with a combined UK spendof £273 million.
The reach of UK talent goes further than British films,
as UK actors, directors and writers work on films
produced in the USA and other countries (Chapter 5).
Thirty-one of the top 200 films at the world box officein 2001–2006 were based on stories and characters
created by British writers including JK Rowling (theHarry Potter films), JRR Tolkien (The Lord of the Rings),
CS Lewis (The Chronicles of Narnia), Brian Aldiss(A.I. Artificial Intelligence), Patrick O’Brian (Master andCommander: The Far Side of the World) and Sacha
Baron Cohen (Borat). British directors directed 19 ofthese top 200 films and British actors appeared in
more than half of them. Ridley Scott was themost-frequent director and Orlando Bloom and
Sir Ian McKellan the most frequent actors.
Better quality, better marketing
There were signs of an improvement in the quality andmarketing of British films. As Chapter 6 shows, 60% of
UK films certified in the years 2000 to 2005 had beenreleased internationally by March 2007 and thereleased films accounted for 82% of the total budgetof all UK films certified in that period. For Schedule 1
films (films that pass the standard test of ’Britishness’
in the Films Act 1985) the international release rate
improved from 60% to 70% over the period. There
was also a 25% improvement in the proportion ofinternational release opportunities achieved by British
films between 2000 and 2005.

2006: The year in review | 3

Low cost inflation

What’s new in this Yearbook?

These improved results have been achieved without,apparently, any significant increase in production costs.
The median production budget for domestic UK
productions actually fell from £3 million in 2003 to£1.5 million in 2006 and the median co-production
budget has been constant for the last three years(Chapter 14). Similarly, the 2006 Skillset film
production workforce survey did not show any signsof inflation in wages and salaries. The size distributionof incomes was about the same as it was when thelast survey was completed in 2003/04 (Chapter 17)
with half the respondents reporting incomes of under£20,000 per year. This is despite the concentration of
the industry around London – 76% of the production
workforce was based in London and the South East –where one might expect higher rates to prevail.

Regular readers of the UK Film Council Statistical
Yearbook will notice a number of changes this year,
in particular:

The workforce diversity challenge• Expanded coverage of the UK’s overseas trade in film
(Chapter 16).

Compared to the UK workforce as a whole, the film
production workforce is more concentrated in the
25–50 age brackets. There are fewer workers under 25
or over 50 compared with the UK average (Chapter
17). There is also a marked gender difference: themajority of women in the industry are under 35,
whereas two-thirds of the men are over 35. This
statistic supports anecdotal evidence that many
women drop out of the industry in their mid-thirties
due to the long, unsocial hours of the production
sector. The sector has a task on its hands to find waysof making its working practices more family-friendly.
Disabled workers are under-represented in the industry(only 3% in 2006) and, most challenging of all, the2006 Skillset production workforce survey showed thatthe minority ethnic group profile in the industry did
not improve over the last three to four years. Only 5%of the film production workforce was from a minority
ethnic background, compared to 7% in the UK
workforce as a whole and 24% in the London
workforce, the most appropriate comparator due
to the concentration of film production in London.
Research in 2006 into ethnicity and gender in thefilm and wider audio-visual sectors (publication
forthcoming) showed that informal recruitment
persists, affecting women trying to break into underrepresented roles (such as writing and directing)and people from minority ethnic backgrounds who
are not already connected to these informal networks.
For this reason, the UK Film Council has challenged
the sector to make faster progress on diversity in2006 and successive years by setting up a Leadershipin Diversity Forum to plan practical measures toimplement 2005’s Equality Charter for Film.
See http://www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk/information/
aboutus/diversity/
4 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook• A new analysis of the success of UK film talentaround the world (Chapter 5).
• A new analysis of the release history of UK films
since 2000 (Chapter 6).
• Extension of information on exhibition to coverfilm societies and community cinema (Chapter 9).
• The reintroduction of an analysis of film on television(Chapter 12).
• An analysis of the size and trends in the UK film
market as a whole covering theatrical, DVD/video
and television (Chapter 13).

Within the limits of data availability, the RSU isdeveloping the Yearbook to meet the business,
economic, cultural and policy needs of UK film.
Feedback is welcome and, if you would like todiscuss any of the content with us, or makesuggestions, please contact us at the number or
email address below. The information in thisYearbook is also published on our website –www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk
Finally, a special thank you to all our data suppliers,
who have allowed us to publish the statistical resultsarising from their surveying and tracking activities withsuitable protections for the confidentiality of individual
respondents and the commercial interests of the
suppliers. This is a valuable service to the public andeveryone connected with UK film.
Sean Perkins, Research Executive.
Edmond Ng, Senior Research Executive.
David Steele, Head of Research and Statistics.
About the Research and Statistics Unit
The Research and Statistics Unit (RSU) provides
research data and market intelligence to anyone
with an interest in UK film and film in the UK.
Research enquiries should be directed to the RSU(+44 (0)20 7861 7940, rsu@ukfilmcouncil.org.uk).
All other enquiries should be made to
the UK Film Council Communications
Department (+44 (0)20 7861 7861,
communications@ukfilmcouncil.org.uk).

Executive summary
The box officeMore than 500 films were released in 2006 with one
in five of these a UK production. Despite the wider
choice of film on offer, audiences dipped for thesecond successive year. At the same time, market sharefor the top 100 films since 1997 shows audiences forfilms are diversifying.
• UK cinema admissions were 157 million in 2006,
down 5% on 2005.
• Box office earnings were £762 million, down 1%
on 2005.
• The top 100 films earned almost 89% of the grossbox office.
• 505 films were released in the UK and Republic of
Ireland, 8% up on 2005 and 37% up on 2002.
• UK films, including co-productions, accounted forjust over 21% of releases and 19% of the market
by value.
Top films in 2006
Casino Royale and Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead
Man’s Chest dominated the charts in 2006. Three UK
films appeared in the top 20 but many achieved
distinction through film awards.
• The top 20 UK films grossed £151 million at the
UK box office.
• Three UK films featured in the top 20 – Casino
Royale, The Da Vinci Code and Flushed Away.
• Casino Royale was the biggest film of the year,
earning over £55 million.
• The USA was involved in every production in the
top 20 films at the UK box office, partnering the
UK on three.
• UK films topped the weekly box office charts for five
weeks in 2006.

Top films 1997–2006
Two 2006 releases – Casino Royale and Pirates of the
Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest – entered the top 20
films of the decade. Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings
films dominated the decade, while UK writers provided
the inspiration for 12 out of the top 20 films.
• The top 20 films of the decade included two 2006
release: Casino Royale and Pirates of the Caribbean:
Dead Man’s Chest.
• Casino Royale became the second highest grossing
UK film of all time.
• The Da Vinci Code was the only other 2006 UK
release in the last decade’s UK top 20.
• Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings films took sevenplaces in the top 13 films of the decade.
• 8 of the top 20 films were UK/USA collaborations.
• 12 of the top 20 films were based on stories andcharacters created by UK writers.
UK films internationally
After last year’s outstanding success in the global
marketplace, UK films delivered a more average
performance in 2006. Even so, the top 10 UK films
grossed almost $2000 million worldwide.
• The top 10 performing UK films worldwide grossed$1,960 million in 2006, 25% down on $2,599
million in 2005.
• In Europe the top British films were The Da Vinci
Code with 31.2 million admissions and Casino
Royale with 23 million.
• The Da Vinci Code was the strongest UK film at theworldwide box office.
• UK films accounted for 12% of releases in the USA,unchanged from 2005.
• The market share of British films at the US box
office was 9%, down from 16% in 2005, at a valueof $845 million.
• Worldwide the gross box office for films of all
countries of origin increased by 11% in 2006 to$26 billion.

2006: The year in review | 5

UK talent and the global box officeLanguage, genre and classification

Stories created by UK writers have dominated theglobal box office over the last few years and British
acting talent has also played a starring role in many
recent blockbusters helping to project strong imagesof UK cultural and national identity across the world.

Film culture in the UK is increasingly diverse. The record
number of films on release in 2006 gave audiences
access to the best cinema from across the globe, in 30
different languages, as well as films varying in subject
matter, genre and style.

• 31 of the top 200 films worldwide from 2001-2006
are based on stories and characters created by UK
writers and have earned more than $13 billion.

• 171 foreign language films were released, 33.9% of
total releases, down from 43.5% in 2005.

• Six of the top 10 global box office successes of thelast six years are based on the novels of British writers
JRR Tolkien and JK Rowling.
• UK acting talent feature in more than half of the top
200 films released worldwide since 2001.
• British directors have directed 19 of the 200 biggest
films of the last six years.
Release history of UK films
The cinema release of a feature film has an important
influence on its performance in later release windows
such as retail and rental DVD and video-on-demand.
However, not all UK films get a theatrical releaseinternationally or even locally.
• International UK film releases increased as aproportion of international release opportunities.
• 60.2% of UK films were internationally released
accounting for 82.3% of total UK film budgets.
• Almost half (47.5%) of UK films certified between
2000 and 2005 and accounting for 71.8% of total UK
film budgets have been released in the UK and theRepublic of Ireland.
• The international release rate of British films
certified between 2000 and 2005 improved from
60% to 70%.
• Schedule 1 British films were more likely to betheatrically released in the UK, Ireland andinternationally than UK co-productions.
• Almost 100% of UK studio films have achieved aninternational theatrical release compared with just
57% of independent UK films.

• Films in 30 different languages (including English)
were released in the UK in 2006.
• Foreign language films accounted for over a thirdof all releases but just 3.5% of the total UK box
office gross.
• Foreign language films averaged 17 sites at theirwidest point of release, compared to 162 for English
language films.
• Hindi was the most common foreign language interms of the number of releases.
• Comedy, traditionally popular with audiences,accounted for 24% of releases and 27% of the box
office gross.
• Drama films made up the highest proportion of
releases (30.5%) but only shared 10.1% of the total
box office.
• More documentaries were released in 2006 than2005 (32) but their box office share fell to 0.4%.
• More ‘15’ certificate films were released than any
other category but ‘12A’ films accounted for thelargest box office share.
Distribution
A small number of large companies dominate the
distribution of films in the UK investing millions ofpounds in attracting audiences to the cinema.
• The top ten distributors had a 96% share of themarket in 2006, 1% down on 2005.
• Weekends (Friday to Sunday) accounted for 60%of the box office.
• Opening weekends represented 27% of the total
box office.
• Total advertising spend increased by 3.3% to£171.3 million.

6 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Exhibition
For most film-lovers, the best way to enjoy film is on
the big screen, with a large audience. The fortunes ofthe exhibition sector are therefore an important
indicator of the vitality of film culture. On this basis,
film is thriving, with the number of screens increasing
year on year since 2002. Screenings run by providers
serving their local communities, including film societies
and mixed-use venues are also an important part of the
UK’s diverse exhibition landscape.
• The UK had 3,440 screens in 697 cinemas, 83 morethan 2005 (5.8 screens per 100,000 people).
• London had the highest number (15%) of screens
overall followed by the South East and North West.
• Only 7% of screens were dedicated to ‘specialised’films, with 0.5% showing South Asian films.
• The proportion of screens in multiplexes remained
unchanged at 73%.
• Northern Ireland had the highest number of screensper 100,000 people, and England had the lowest.
• The five largest exhibitors operated 75% of screens.
• The average ticket price was £4.87.
• The UK had 148 digital screens, over two and halftimes more than in 2005.
• Film societies attracted over 225,000 admissions.
• Rural areas had 42% of the UK’s film societies.
Audiences
Despite the ready availability of home-based
entertainment, going to the cinema is still a highly
popular activity, particularly for younger age groups.
• The cinema audience for the top 20 films in 2006 was
predominantly young, with the 7-34 age group (40%of the population) making up 64% of the audience.

• Minority ethnic groups were equally or overrepresented in the film audience, except for retailDVD/video where they were under-represented.
• Disabled people were under-represented in the film
audience, except for retail DVD/video.
• 12% of cinema-goers reported they had downloaded
a film for free off the Internet.
• The audience for film on television was older thanthat of the cinema audience and skewed towards theC2 and DE social groups.
Film on DVD
Films reach a wide audience through their release onvideo, though home viewers do not always choose thebox office favourites. Home viewing is now almost
entirely in DVD format, with even newer digitaltechnologies edging their way into the market.
• 116 million DVDs were rented in 2006 and 227
million DVDs were sold.
• The total value of the rental and sales market in 2006
was £2.5 billion, down 7% on 2005 although DVD
sales increased by 7%.
• Film accounts for 99% of the DVD rental market and72%% of DVD sales.
• British films accounted for 17% of all DVD rental
transactions and 19% of sales.
• Flightplan was the top rental title and Pirates of
the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest was the highest
DVD seller.
• Online DVD rental accounted for 24% of rental
transactions.
• 80% of households now own a DVD player comparedwith only 25% five years ago.

• 60% of the UK population said they went to thecinema at least once a year and 18% went once amonth or more.
• There was an even split between men and womenin the cinema audience of the top 20 films.
• Dramas and comedies with women in leadingroles plus family films appealed most to thefemale audience.
• Action-led films held stronger male appeal.
• Younger age groups preferred action, animation andcomedy films while drama appealed more to theover-35s.

2006: The year in review | 7

Film on UK television
Opportunities to watch film on television have neverbeen wider, with multi-channel television gaining in
popularity. Viewing patterns have correspondingly
fragmented. Even so, one in six people in the UK
watched the year’s favourite TV film, Pirates of the
Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, on BBC1.
• 2,011 films were shown on terrestrial channels in
2006, down 14% on 2005 but the proportion of UK
films increased.
• 438 UK films were shown on terrestrial television(22% of the total).
• 41 foreign language films were shown(2% of the total).
• An average of 1.5 million people watched each filmon peak time television (down from 2 million in2005), compared to median audiences for the top
50 films at the cinema of 1.7 million.
• Multi-channel television accounted for over 33%
of the UK television audience in 2006, up from 30%
in 2005.

• DVD/video sales accounted for the largest share (42%)
of UK film revenues.
• Film piracy and competition from new forms ofdigital leisure activities, particularly online
entertainment are creating a plateau in film revenues.
• Sell-through revenues boomed between 2000
and 2004.
• Film revenues in the UK peaked in 2004 and thendeclined significantly.
• Research suggests that the decreasing theatricalwindow has not has not contributed to the fall in
UK cinema admissions.
Film production
The UK film industry is both an independent creatorof feature films and a provider of services to theinternational film industry. In 2006, UK production
activity bounced back from the lower level of 2005,
reaching £842 million, the second highest year onrecord. This reflects greater industry confidence after
the announcement of the UK’s new film tax relief.

• 2006 saw a 46% increase in UK production activity• The top terrestrial film was Pirates of the Caribbean:
to £842 million from £577 million in 2005.
The Curse of the Black Pearl on BBC1, with 9.5 million
viewers – one in six of the UK population.
• Budgets for inward investment films increased
substantially, reflecting the higher number of big• The top film on subscription movie channels wasbudget studio films made in the UK in 2006.
The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch andthe Wardrobe on Sky Movies (650,000 viewers).
• Five US majors accounted for almost two-thirdsof the UK spend associated with inward investment• The top film on multi-channel overall was Die
features.
Another Day on ITV2 (1.6 million viewers).
• The UK spend associated with inward investment• There were 3.3 billion viewings of feature film acrossfeatures jumped 84% from £309 million to
all television formats (except pay-per-view) in 2006 –£570 million.
over 21 times the number of cinema but down from
3.9 billion in 1997.
• The number of UK domestic features increased
significantly, from 39 in 2005 to 50 in 2006; however• There were nearly five times more films on television
the median budget fell significantly.
in 2006 than a decade ago, largely as a result ofsubscription film channels.
• The number of UK co-productions continued to fall,though the UK spend increased compared with 2005.
• The value of film to broadcasters was approximately£1.07 billion.
• Most UK co-productions continued to be shot in the
UK or Western Europe, though there was a further
The UK film market as a wholeincrease in Eastern European shoots, led by Hungary
and Romania.
While much of the publicity and media attention forfilms occurs around the cinema release, it is the film
• UK film production was dispersed over manymarket as a whole that recovers the costs of production
production companies, with only a small minority
and marketing and makes profits (or not) for film
being involved with more than one feature.
producers and investors. The sale and rental ofDVDs/videos are particularly important for filmmakers
and distributors in revenue terms and sales to televisionalso generate significant income.
• The UK had the third-largest filmed entertainment
market in the world after the USA and Japan (2005).
8 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Film industry companies

Employment in the film and video industries

The number of film production companies has grownyear on year since 1996. Many of these companies are
small in size but there has also been expansion in the
bigger companies. The French topped the league of the
20 leading film production companies in Europe, but anumber of British companies were also prominent.

The film and video industries employ substantial
numbers of highly skilled workers. While employment
levels are somewhat volatile, reflecting the variable levelof demand for the sector’s services, employment has
increased by a third over the past decade.

• The number of small production companies grew themost, but the largest turnover size group also grew.
• The number of film production companies grew by
256% between 1996 and 2006.
• US majors, video distributors and exhibitors wereprominent in the top 16 UK film companies in 2004.
• The top six UK film production companies had aturnover in 2004/05 of e195.5 million.
• Across Europe, French companies were prominent inaddition to the US majors.
• French, UK, German and Italian companies wereprominent in the top 20 European film production
companies in 2005.
• Only six non-single-purpose vehicle UK companies
could be identified in the top 100 European film
production companies in 2005.
• In the distribution and exhibition sectors, numbers
grew in the larger turnover brackets.

• 42,230 people worked in the film and video industry
in 2005/06, of whom around 24,213 worked in film
and video production, a decrease on 2005.
• The film and video industry workforce was 33%
higher in 2006 than in 1994, compared with a 13%
increase in the overall workforce.
• 48% of people in film and video production
were freelance.
• Women made up 40% of the film production
workforce in 2006 (33% in 2002) and they were paidless than men on average.
• People from minority ethnic groups are underrepresented in film production, 5%, the same as
in 2002.
• Production and distribution were concentrated in
London and the south-east, with 76% and 68%
respectively of the workforce.
• 58% of employees in film and video production werein workplaces with ten or fewer people.

UK film exports
The UK film industry is a strong exporter, earning royalty
income from around the world, providing production
services to overseas (particularly USA) film producers
and contributing a trade surplus to the UK’s balanceof payments.
• The UK film industry exported £967 million worth ofservices in 2005, comprising £660 million in royalties
and £307 million in film production services.
• The UK’s film trade surplus grew in 2005 to £163
million, the highest for the 11 year.
• Exports grew by 65% between 2003 and 2005.
• UK film imports consisted largely of royalty payments
to overseas rights’ owners.
• The USA was the largest market for UK film exports,taking 61% of total film exports in 2005.
• Europe was our second largest market, taking 19%
of UK film exports.
• UK exports performed better in Australia andOceania, but were under-represented in Asia.

2006: The year in review | 9

1: THE BOX OFFICE
More than 500 films were released in the UK in 2006
with one in five of these a UK production. Despite
the wider choice of film on offer in the UK, audiences
dipped for the second successive year. At the same time,
market share for the top 100 films since 1997 showsaudiences for films are diversifying.

UK cinema
admissions were
157 million in
2006

The top 100 films
earned almost
89% of the grossbox office

T
U
O
B
A
L
L
A
S
’
T
“I

10 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

£762 million
was taken at the
UK box office

UK films, including
co-productions, accounted
for just over 21% of releases
and 19% of the market
by value

S
E
S
S
O
R
G
Box office earnings
for films in the UK
has increased by 56%
in nine years

505 films werereleased in the UK
and Republic of Ireland,
8% up on 2005 and
37% up on 2002
1: The box office | 11

1.1 Admissions
The 156.6 million cinema admissions recorded for the UK in 2006 were down 5% on 2005, the second
successive year in which audiences declined (Table 1.1). Major territories which experienced declining audiencesin 2005, some far in excess of the UK’s fall, staged something of a recovery last year. According to the MPAA,
US admissions increased by 3.2% to 1.45 billion, although this figure was still the second lowest since 2001.
Ticket sales in Germany rose by 8% and French admissions increased by 7%. The Nordic territories also saw
ticket sales increase, as did Italy, but Spain experienced a 3% fall.
Table 1.1 UK annual admissions, 1997–2006
Total admissions(millions)

Year

1997

138.9

1998

135.2

1999

139.1

2000

142.5

2001

155.9

2002

175.9

2003

167.3

2004

171.3

2005

164.7

2006

156.6

Source: CAA, Nielsen EDI.

Figure 1.1 illustrates the upward trend in admissions until 2002, followed by a plateau around the 167 million
mark, then falling last year to its lowest level since 2001.
Figure 1.1 Annual UK admissions, 1997–2006
Millions
200

150

100

50

0

1997

1998

Source: CAA, Nielsen EDI.

12 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Monthly admissions fell below 10 million on three separate occasions during the course of the year, which has
not happened since 2000 (Table 1.2). The year started on a positive note, helped by the continuing strong
performance of 2005 releases such as The Chronicles of Narnia and King Kong, and awards contenders such as
Brokeback Mountain and Walk the Line. Two successive falls in February and March were reversed in April withthe release of Ice Age II. The major distributors avoided releasing any significant titles in June as the World Cup
kicked off and record temperatures also had a negative impact on cinema audiences – average weekly admissions
in this month fell to two million (compared with the yearly average of three million). With the football over,admissions in July were boosted by Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest and an average of 3.7 million
tickets were sold per week (Table 1.3). However, most of the late summer blockbusters failed to deliver as
expected and admissions declined into the autumn. September’s admissions were down to 8.5 million, the lowest
since June 2000, and although ticket sales increased in October, the year-on-year comparison was still negative.
Then, the release of Casino Royale in November ensured that admissions were up on 2005 for only the fifth time,with weekly admissions back up to 3.6 million.
Table 1.2 Monthly UK cinema admissions, 2005/06
2005(million)

2006(million)% +/–on 2005

January

13.4

14.0

+4.5

February

14.8

12.8

–13.5

March

12.3

9.9

–19.5

April

10.6

13.6

+28.3

May

13.1

13.2

+0.8

June

10.5

8.7

–17.1

July

16.0

16.3

+1.9

August

15.9

15.0

–5.7

September

9.5

8.5

–10.5

October

15.6

13.5

–13.5

November

15.2

15.5

+2.0

December

17.6

15.3

–13.1

Total

164.7

156.6

–4.9

Month

Source: CAA, Nielsen EDI.

From left
Pirates of the Caribbean:
Dead Man’s Chest, courtesy of
Buena Vista Home Entertainment.
King Kong © Universal Studios.
All rights reserved.
1: The box office | 13

Table 1.3 Average weekly admissions, 2005/06
2005
weekly average(million)

2006
weekly average(million)January

3.0

3.2

February

3.7

3.2

March

2.8

2.2

April

2.5

3.2

May

3.0

3.0

June

2.5

2.0

July

3.6

3.7

August3.6

3.4

September

2.2

2.0

October

3.5

3.1

November

3.5

3.6

December

4.0

3.5

Month

Source: CAA, Nielsen EDI.

Table 1.4 shows how the 2006 admissions break down by ISBA TV region. The pattern remains largely unchanged
on 2005, and the areas with the highest concentrations of population – London, the Midlands and Lancashire –accounted for half of all UK admissions in 2006.
Table 1.4 Cinema admissions by region, 2006
Admissions(million)

Admissions%

London39.8

25.4

Midlands

21.9

14.0

Lancashire

17.4

11.1

Southern

14.1

9.0

Yorkshire

13.0

8.3

Central Scotland

11.2

7.2

East of England

10.3

6.6

Wales and West

10.0

6.4

North East

5.9

3.8

Northern Ireland

5.0

3.2

South West

3.3

2.1

Northern Scotland

3.3

2.1

Border

1.4

0.9

Total

156.6

100.0

RegionSource: CAA, Nielsen EDI.

14 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

AboveCasino Royale © 2006 Danjaq, LLC
and United Artists Corporation andColumbia Pictures Industries, Inc.
All rights reserved.
1: The box office | 15

1.2 Box office earnings
According to the CAA/Nielsen EDI data, the total UK box office for 2006 was £762 million. This figure covers allbox office earnings during the calendar year 2006 for all films exhibited in the UK. The trends in box office takingsfrom 1997 are shown in Table 1.5 and indicate a 56% growth in the period.
Table 1.5 UK box office trends, 1997–2006
Box office gross(£ million)%+/–

Cumulative %

1997

489

0.0

–

1998

547

10.0

10.0

1999

563

2.9

15.1

2000

583

3.6

19.2

2001

645

10.6

31.9

2002

755

17.0

54.4

2003

742

–1.7

51.7

2004

770

3.8

57.5

2005

770

0.0

57.5

2006

762

–1.0

55.8

Year

Source: CAA, Nielsen EDI.

1.3 Film releases and box office revenues
505 films (on release for a week or more) were released in the UK and Republic of Ireland in 2006, an increase of
8% on 2005 and 37% on 2002. They generated £845 million in box office revenues – unchanged from 2005.
This figure differs from the £762 million quoted in paragraph 1.2 above because it includes revenues generated
in 2007 by films released in 2006 and covers the Republic of Ireland as well as the UK.
As can be seen in Table 1.6, the top 100 films took 89% of the box office. The remaining 405 films (80% of all
releases) accounted for just 11% of gross revenues.
Table 1.6 Summary of results at the UK and Republic of Ireland box office, 2002–2006
2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

369

423

451

467

505

Combined gross £ million

809.4

829.7

822.0

844.9

845.3

Top 20 films (% of box office)

60.3

53.5

49.4

54.7

48.1

Top 50 films (% of box office)

82.3

77.8

75.5

75.7

71.1

Top 100 films (% of box office)

94.4

92.3

92.6

91.5

88.6

Releases

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.
Table 1.6 and all subsequent analysis of the theatrical market includes all titles released in 2006. The combined gross reflects the territorial gross(ie including the Republic of Ireland), and covers those titles released in 2006, but also making money into 2007, up to and including 4 March 2007.

From left
The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion,
the Witch and the Wardrobe, courtesyof Buena Vista Home Entertainment.
The Da Vinci Code© Sony Pictures Releasing.
16 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 1.6 clearly demonstrates the fall in share of the top 100 films since 2002 – significantly so for the top
50 films. This may be a result of several factors: the under-performance of potential blockbusters; a change in theperceived quality of major studio product; an ageing cinema population and pressures from piracy and digital
home entertainment. Figures 1.2 and 1.3 explore these issues further, looking back to 1997. While the share of
the top 50 films has declined, the films ranked 51–150 have seen an increase in share, as have the films outside
the top 150. This could be an indicator of diversifying audience tastes as well as the issues described above.
Figure 1.3 further illustrates the plateau in box office revenues, and underlines the decline in revenue of the top
50 films from a peak in 2002, contrasting with the rise in income generated by the films ranked 51–100.
Figure 1.2 Market share of top 50, top 51–150 and rest of films, 1997–2006
%
100

80

60

40

20

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

% shareof rest

1

1

2

3

1

2

2

3

3

5

% share of
top 51–150

14

16

16

17

14

16

20

22

21

24

% share of
top 50

85

83

82

81

84

82

78

75

76

71

0

Figure 1.3 Gross box office of top 50, top 51–150 and rest of films, 1997–2006£ million
900

675

450

225

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Gross box officeof rest

4

6

11

16

11

16

21

23

25

38

Gross box officeof top 51–150

76

85

98

106

105

132

160

179

182

206

Gross box officeof top 50

452

452

502

514

628

680

634

622

641

600

0

1: The box office | 17

Table 1.7 outlines the number of films released in the UK in 2006 by the number of sites at the widest point of
release. A total of 165 films were released on 100 sites or more (33%), while 178 films were released on fewer
than 10 sites (35% of all films released). Six out of ten films released in the UK went out on 49 prints or fewer.
Table 1.7 Number of releases and average box office grossby number of sites at widest point of release, 2006
Number of sites at widest point of release

Number% releases

Averagebox office (£)

>500

8

1.6 28,330,000

400–49929

5.7

8,626,000

300–39954

10.7

3,893,000

200–29948

9.5

1,836,000

100–19926

5.1

905,000

50–99

34

6.7

558,000

10–49

128

25.3

174,000

<10

178

35.2

30,000

Total

505

100.0

1,674,000

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.

1.4 Country of origin of film releases
We apply the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) definition of a UK film under Schedule 1 of theFilms Act (1985) for our analysis. Films released during the period under review needed a minimum UK spendof 70% and a specified proportion of labour costs paid to qualifying individuals to qualify under Schedule 1.
A film could also qualify if it satisfied the terms of one of the UK’s co-production treaties. From 1 April 2006
new Schedule 1 criteria applied, but the UK films discussed here fall within the old definition, as the definition
is applied at the point of production rather than release.*
As Table 1.8 indicates, of all films released last year, 44% were of US origin (excluding UK co-productions), andthese films accounted for 77% of the total box office earnings (up from 63% in 2005).
UK films, including co-productions, accounted for 21% of releases and 19% of the box office, out of which
UK/USA collaborations earned over 15% of the box office despite representing only 5% of releases. This wasdue mainly to Casino Royale, The Da Vinci Code and Flushed Away.
Films whose country of origin lies outside the UK and USA accounted for 35% of releases but only 3.7% of
earnings. Indian films alone, such as Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna, Don and Fanaa, represented 15.6% of all releases
and 1.8% of revenues. Films from the rest of the world (excluding Europe) accounted for 0.7% of the box officefrom 9% of the releases and European films represented 1.2% of the box office gross from 12.5% of releases.
*The new Cultural Test definition came into force on 1 January 2007.

Left
Don, courtesy of UTV Motionpictures.
18 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 1.8 Country of origin of films released in the UK and Republic of Ireland, 2006
No. of releases
in 2006% of allreleases

2006 box office(£ million)

2006 box officeshare (%)

USA solo

190

37.6

580.1

68.6

USA co-productions (other)

30

5.9

71.9

8.5

Sub-total

220

43.6

652.0

77.1

UK and UK co-productions

83

16.4

35.4

4.2

UK/USA

24

4.8

125.6

14.9

Sub-total

107

21.2

161.0

19.1

Europe

63

12.5

10.3

1.2

India

69

13.7

15.6

1.8

Rest of the world

46

9.1

6.3

0.7

Total

505

100

845.3

100

Country of origin

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.
Box office gross = cumulative total up to 4 March 2007.
Due to rounding, some numbers do not add up to exactly the totals shown.

The changes in market share over time by country of origin of films are shown in Table 1.9. US market share was
the highest since 2003 while, conversely, UK share was the lowest since that year. Indian film market share was
the highest recorded to date, and although market share for European film fell slightly, it was still double theshare recorded in 2004.
Table 1.9 Market share by country of origin, 2002–2006
2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

USA

73.4

81.6

73.2

63.1

77.1

UK

24.4

15.7

23.4

33.0

19.1

Europe

0.7

0.9

0.6

1.6

1.2

India

1.0

1.0

1.1

1.5

1.8

Rest of the world

0.5

0.8

1.8

0.8

0.7

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

Total

From left
Flushed Away, courtesy of
Paramount Pictures.
Children of Men, distributedby Universal Pictures.
1: The box office | 19

Table 1.10 compares the number of UK films across several gross box office bands with the non-UK output in2006. The UK is better represented in the top band of box office earnings than the non-UK releases, thanks to
Casino Royale and The Da Vinci Code. However, the UK is less well represented in the mid-range box officeearning bands and three quarters of all UK films released last year made less than £500,000 at the box office.
Table 1.10 UK and non-UK releases by box office gross band, 2006
Box office gross (£ million)

Non-UK releases
Number% releases

UK releases
Number% releases

>£30

1

0.3

2

1.9

20–29.99

3

0.8

0

0

10–19.99

13

3.3

1

0.9

5–9.99

23

5.8

2

1.9

1–4.99

74

18.6

14

13.1

0.5–0.99

26

6.5

8

7.5

0.1–0.49

65

16.3

18

16.8

Less than 0.1

193

48.5

62

57.9

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.

The breadth of film release by country of origin is shown in Table 1.11. USA solo films were the most widely
released, followed by UK/USA collaborations. Indian films were typically released on 14 prints.
Table 1.11 Films on release in UK and Republic of Irelandby country of origin and median widest point of release, 2006
No. of releases
in 2006

2006 box office(£ million)

Medianwidest pointof release

USA solo

190

580.1

219

USA co-productions (other)

30

71.9

187

All USA

220

652.0

216

UK and UK co-productions

83

35.4

19

UK/USA

24

125.6

192

All UK

107

161.0

20

Europe

63

10.3

3

India

69

15.6

14

Rest of the world

46

6.3

6

Total

505

845.3

23

Country of origin

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.

Right
Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna, courtesyof Dharma Productions.
20 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

The average box office per site by country of origin is depicted in Table 1.12. UK/USA collaborations earned themost per site, followed by USA solo and USA co-productions.
Table 1.12 Films on release in UK and Republic of Irelandby country of origin and average box office gross per site, 2006
Average box office
per site (£)

2006 box office(£ million)

Total sites
at widest pointof release

USA solo

15,061580.1

38,514

USA co-productions (other)

13,185

71.9

5,456

All USA

14,828652.0

43,970UK and UK co-productions

7,576

35.4

4,678

UK/USA

26,683

125.6

4,708

All UK

17,160

161.0

9,386

Europe

7,710

10.3

1,342

India

12,028

15.6

1,299

Rest of the world

6,818

6.3

919

Country of origin

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.

See also:
3 For more information about top films in 2006
see chapter 2 (p22)
3 For further details of film distribution in 2006
see chapter 8 (p72)
3 For information about weekend/weekday box office
performance see chapter 6 (p46)
3 For a review of the exhibition sector in 2006
see chapter 9 (p78)

1: The box office | 21

“YO
U’R
E

THE

Three UK films
featured in the
top 20 – Casino Royale,
The Da Vinci Codeand Flushed Away
The top 20 UK films
grossed £151 million at
the UK box office

2: TOP FILMS IN 2006
Two films dominated the charts in 2006 – Casino Royale,
which exceeded all expectations even by Bond’s
standards, and Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s
Chest. Three UK films appeared in the top 20
but many achieved distinction through film awards.
22 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Casino Royale was
the biggest film of
the year, earning over
£55 million

BES
T
UK films topped theweekly box office fivetimes in 2006

The USA was involved
in all of the top 20 films
at the UK box office,partnering the UK
on threeFrom left
Caption to images goes here ego cum
tene sententian Itaque earud reruam
hist entuary sapiente.

2: TopTop films
films inin 2006
2006 || 23
23

2.1 The top 20 films
The two biggest box office attractions of the year were Casino Royale and the second Pirates of the Caribbean
film – Dead Man’s Chest – both earning more than £50 million. The decision to re-energise the Bond franchise
exceeded all expectations, with the twenty-first official outing becoming the most commercially successful to date– taking just three weeks to surpass Die Another Day’s final total of £36 million. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead
Man’s Chest built on the theatrical and home video success of the original film to become the hit of the summer.
However, as Table 2.1 shows, only six films managed to earn more than £20 million last year, compared to ninein 2005, including only three with gross figures over £30 million (down from six in 2005).
Three UK titles featured in the top 20 – Casino Royale, The Da Vinci Code and Flushed Away – which are all
inward investment films made with US involvement. This compares with eight UK/USA titles in the previous
year’s top 20. The lower number of UK/USA releases in 2006 was a reflection of the downturn in inward film
investment in the UK in 2005 as the UK awaited the structure of the then forthcoming new tax incentive for film.
Six animated films appear in 2006’s top 20, the most successful of which was Ice Age II. Sequels and franchises
accounted for six of the top 20 films, up from five in 2005.
Table 2.1 Box office results for the top 20 films released in the UK and Republic of Ireland, 2006
Title

Countryof origin

Box officegross(£ million)

No ofopening
cinemasOpening
weekend gross(£ million)

Distributor

UK/USA/Cze

55.48

505

13.37

Sony Pictures

USA

52.52

514

13.74

Buena Vista

UK/USA

30.42

523

9.50

Sony Pictures

1

Casino Royale*

2

Pirates of the Caribbean:
Dead Man’s Chest

3

The Da Vinci Code

4

Ice Age 2

USA

29.60

502

9.78

20th Century Fox

5

Borat: Cultural Learnings...

USA

24.11

428

6.24

20th Century Fox

6

Night at the Museum*

USA

20.77

488

7.69

20th Century Fox

7

X-Men 3

USA

19.22

446

7.09

20th Century Fox

8Happy Feet*

Aus/USA

18.86

445

3.69

Warner Bros

9

Cars

USA

16.45

513

2.67

Buena Vista

10

Superman Returns

USA/Aus

16.12

477

4.34

Warner Bros

11

Mission: Impossible III

USA

15.45

512

5.38

UIP

12

The Devil Wears Prada

USA

14.02

447

3.27

20th Century Fox

13

Chicken Little

USA

13.51

511

3.17

Buena Vista

14

Over the Hedge

USA

13.22

504

3.59

UIP

15

The Departed*

USA

12.80

363

2.30

Entertainment

16

The Holiday

USA

12.34

428

2.83

Universal

17

Flushed Away*

UK/USA

11.13

468

3.11

Paramount

18

The Break Up

USA

10.38

373

2.41

UIP

19

Walk the Line

USA

10.36

198

1.11

20th Century Fox

20

Brokeback Mountain

USA

10.08

125

0.99

Entertainment

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.
Box office gross = cumulative total up to 4 March 2007.
Films with an asterisk (*) were still being exhibited on 4 March 2007.

24 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

2.2 The top 20 UK films
The top 20 UK films, shown in Table 2.2, had a combined gross of £151 million, which was 18% of the total
UK box office, down from £245 million in 2005 (29% of gross box office). The top three films – Casino Royale,
The Da Vinci Code and Flushed Away made almost £100 million between them. However, unlike previous years
there were no UK films in the £12 million – £30 million gross box office range – a reflection of the decline ininward investment production in the UK in 2005.
Several of the top UK films earned critical praise and major awards in 2006/07. Stephen Frears’s The Queen
featured strongly in the year’s major award ceremonies with an Oscar and BAFTA win for Helen Mirren anda Best Picture award from BAFTA. The Wind that Shakes the Barley proved to be Ken Loach’s most successful
film to date at the UK box office while also winning the director the coveted Palme d’Or at the Cannes Film
Festival. As well as being nominated for the Academy Best Director Award, Paul Greengrass won the BAFTA
for Best Director for United 93. Children of Men was also successful in the Cinematography and Production
Design categories.
Table 2.2 Box office results for the top 20 UK films released in the UK and Republic of Ireland, 2006
Title

Countryof origin

Box office gross(£ million)

Distributor

UK/USA/Cze

55.48

Sony Pictures

1

Casino Royale*

2

The Da Vinci Code

UK/USA

30.42

Sony Pictures

3

Flushed Away*

UK/USA

11.13

Paramount

4

The Queen*

UK/Fra/Ita

9.00

Pathé

5

Stormbreaker

UK/Ger/USA

6.79

Entertainment

6Children of Men

UK/USA

4.86

Universal

7

The History Boys

UK

4.22

20th Century Fox

8

The Wind that Shakes the Barley

UK/Ger/Ita/Spa/Ire

3.91

Pathé

9

V for Vendetta

UK/USA/Ger

3.58

Warner Bros

10

United 93

UK/Fra/USA

2.90

UIP

11

Match Point

UK/USA/Lux

2.47

Icon

12

It’s a Boy Girl Thing

UK/Can

2.42

Icon

13

Derailed

UK/USA

2.30

Buena Vista

14

Alien Autopsy

UK

2.18

Warner Bros

15

Confetti

UK

2.09

20th Century Fox

16

An American Haunting

UK/USA

2.02

Lionsgate

17

Severance

UK/Hun/IoM

1.72

Pathé

18

Basic Instinct 2: Risk Addiction

UK/USA/Ger/Spa

1.16

Entertainment

19

A Cock and Bull Story

UK

1.10

Lionsgate

20

Breaking and Entering

UK/USA

0.97

Buena Vista

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.
Box office gross = cumulative total up to 4 March 2007.
Films with an asterisk (*) were still being exhibited on 4 March 2007.

2: Top films in 2006 | 25

2.3 Best weekend performances of UK films
The performance of a film during its opening weekend is a major factor in deciding how long the film will remain
on release, and most major film marketing campaigns are geared towards maximising audience interest at thestart of a film’s theatrical life. Table 2.3 shows the three UK films that topped the weekend box office charts(of all films) during 2006.
Table 2.3 UK films at No. 1 in the weekend box office charts, 2006
Week at top

Weekend gross(£ million)

Box office gross(£ million)

Distributor

No. of weeks
at No. 1

Casino Royale

17 Nov 06

13.4

55.5

Sony Pictures

3

The Da Vinci Code19 May 06

9.5

30.4

Sony Pictures

1

Children of Men

22 Sept 06

1.3

4.9

UIP

1

Title

From left
Stormbreaker, courtesy ofEntertainment Film Distributors.
The History Boys © 2006 TwentiethCentury Fox. All rights reserved.
26 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

See also:
3 For more about top films since 1997
see chapter 3 (p28)
3 For further information about film distribution in2006 see chapter 8 (p72)
3 For information about weekend/weekday box
office performance see chapter 6 (p46)
Above
The Queen, courtesyof Pathé Distribution.

3 For an overview of the exhibition sector in 2006
see chapter 9 (p78)

2: Top films in 2006 | 27

3: TOP FILMS 1997–2006
Two films from 2006 – Casino Royale and Pirates of the
Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest – entered the top 20 filmsof the decade. Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings films
dominated the decade’s favourites, while UK writers
provided the inspiration for 12 out of the top 20 films.

Casino Royale isthe second highest
grossing UK filmof all timeTI“

28 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

T
U
O
B
A
L
L
A
’S
The Da Vinci Code was
the only other 2006 UK
release in the last decade’s
UK top 20

Twelve of the top 20
films were based onstories and characters
created by UK writers

N
O
I
T
A
N
I
G
A
IM
Eight of the
top 20 films
were UK/USA
collaborations

Harry Potter andLord of the Rings films
took seven places in the
top 13 films of thedecade

The top 20 films of thedecade included two 2006
releases, Casino Royale andPirates of the Caribbean:
Dead Man’s Chest

From left
Caption to images goes here ego cum
tene sententian Itaque earud reruam
hist entuary sapiente.

3: Top films 1997–2006 | 29

3.1 Top films in the UK, 1997–2006
Two films released in 2006 appear in the list of the top films over the last ten years. Casino Royale and Pirates of
the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest joined a select group of ten films to have made more than £50 million at the’all-time’ UK box office. The list, shown in Table 3.1, is dominated by franchise movies, including four Harry Potter
titles, the Lord of the Rings trilogy and the Star Wars prequels. In fact, only three of the top 20 are neither sequels
nor franchise titles. The importance of UK creative talent to the global film industry is underlined by the presenceof no fewer than 12 films based on stories and characters created by UK writers.
Table 3.1 Top 20 films at the UK box office, 1997–2006
Film

Country oforiginUK boxoffice total(£ million)

UK distributor

Year ofrelease

USA

69.03

20th Century Fox

1998

1

Titanic

2

Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone

UK/USA

66.10

Warner Bros

2001

3

Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring

USA/NZ

63.00

Entertainment

2001

4

Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King

USA/NZ

61.06

Entertainment

2003

5

Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers

USA/NZ

57.60

Entertainment

2002

6

Casino Royale

UK/USA/Czech

55.48

Sony Pictures

2006

7

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

UK/USA

54.78

Warner Bros

2002

8

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest

USA

52.52

Buena Vista

2006

9

The Full Monty

UK/USA

52.23

20th Century Fox

1997

10

Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace

USA

51.06

20th Century Fox

1999

11

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

UK/USA

48.59

Warner Bros

2005

12

Shrek 2

USA

48.10

UIP

2004

13

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

UK/USA

46.08

Warner Bros

2004

14

The Chronicles of Narnia:
The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe

USA/NZ

44.40

Buena Vista

2005

15

Toy Story 2

USA

44.31

Buena Vista

2000

16

Bridget Jones’s Diary

UK/USA

42.01

UIP

2001

17

Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith

USA

39.43

20th Century Fox

2005

18

Monsters, Inc.

USA

37.91

Buena Vista

2002

19

Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones

USA

37.55

20th Century Fox

2002

20

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

UK/USA

37.46

Warner Bros

2005

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.
Figures have not been inflation adjusted.

30 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

3.2 Top UK films of the last decade
Casino Royale became the second highest grossing UK film of all time, behind the first Harry Potter movie.
The Da Vinci Code was the only other 2006 UK title to make it into the UK top 20 of the decade. The list,
shown in Table 3.2, is dominated by inward investment features, with British talent, infrastructure and locations
supported by US studio investment. All four Harry Potter films feature in the top 20, together with four films fromthe James Bond franchise. The nation’s favourites include several comedies, from the antics of Wallace and Gromit
to Calendar Girls.
Table 3.2 Top 20 UK films at the UK box office, 1997–2006
Film

Country oforiginUK boxoffice total(£ million)

UK distributor

Year ofrelease1

Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone

UK/USA

66.10

Warner Bros

2001

2

Casino Royale

UK/USA/Cze

55.48

Sony Pictures

2006

3

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

UK/USA

54.78

Warner Bros

2002

4

The Full Monty

UK/USA

52.23

20th Century Fox

1997

5

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

UK/USA

48.59

Warner Bros

2005

6

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

UK/USA

46.08

Warner Bros

2004

7

Bridget Jones’s Diary

UK/USA

42.01

UIP

2001

8

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

UK/USA

37.46

Warner Bros

2005

9

Love Actually

UK/USA

36.80

UIP

2003

10

Die Another Day

UK/USA

36.06

20th Century Fox

2002

11

Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason

UK/USA

36.00

UIP

2004

12

Wallace & Gromit:
The Curse of the Were-Rabbit

UK/USA

32.00

UIP

2005

13

Notting Hill

UK/USA

31.00

Universal

1999

14

The Da Vinci Code

UK/USA

30.42

Sony Pictures

2006

15

Chicken Run

UK/USA

29.51

Pathé

2000

16

The World is not Enough

UK/USA

28.58

UIP

1999

17

Shakespeare in Love

UK/USA

20.81

UIP

1999

18

Calendar Girls

UK/USA

20.43

Buena Vista

2003

19

The Mummy Returns

UK/USA

20.39

UIP

2001

20

Tomorrow Never Dies

UK/USA

19.88

UIP

1997

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.

See also:
3 For top films in 2006 see chapter 2 (p22)
3 For more on UK talent see chapter 5 (p38)

3: Top films 1997–2006 | 31

Worldwide the grossbox office for all films
increased by 11% in2006 to $26 billion

“PL

AY
IT

The Da Vinci Codewas the strongest UK
film at the worldwide
box office

UK films
accounted for
12% of releases
in the USA

4: UK FILMS INTERNATIONALLY
After last year’s outstanding success in the global
marketplace, UK films delivered a more average
performance in 2006. Even so, the top 10 UK films
grossed almost $2 billion worldwide.
32 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

TOThe market share of
British films at the USA box
office was 9%, down from
16% in 2005, at a value of$845 million
The top 10 performing
UK films worldwide grossed$1,960 million in 2006,
25% down on 2005

THE
WO
RLD
In Europe, the top
British films were The Da
Vinci Code with 31.2 million
admissions and Casino
Royale with 23 million

From left
Caption to images goes here ego cum
tene sententian Itaque earud reruam
hist entuary sapiente.

4: UK films internationally | 33

4.1 UK films worldwide
UK-originated films had an 8.5% share of the global theatrical market in 2006, down from 15.5% in 2005.
The 45% decline was due to the fall in inward investment production in the UK in 2005, resulting in fewer
major UK/USA collaborations in the international market last year. As Table 4.1 shows, the UK’s share has
fluctuated quite widely in the last four years and the results for 2006 are closer to the pre-2005 figures.
Table 4.1 UK global market share figure, 2002–2006
UK film
Globalworldwide gross theatrical market$ billion$ billionYear

UK share
%

2006

2.2

25.8

8.5

2005

3.6

23.2

15.5

2004

2.9

25.2

11.5

2003

1.4

20.3

6.9

2002

1.8

19.8

9.1

Source: MPAA, RSU.

According to Variety, the top 10 performing UK films worldwide grossed a total of $1,960 million in 2006
(Table 4.2). The top film was The Da Vinci Code with a worldwide gross of $758 million. Casino Royale earned$494 million in 2006, although this had subsequently risen to $588 million by the end of February 2007.
Two other UK films earned more than $100 million in worldwide ticket sales: Flushed Away and V for Vendetta.
Table 4.2 Top 10 UK films worldwide, 2006
Title

Country of origin

Worldwide gross$ million

UK/USA

758

1

The Da Vinci Code2

Casino Royale

UK/USA/Cze

494

3

Flushed Away

UK/USA

139

4

V for Vendetta

UK/USA/Ger

133

5

Nanny McPhee

UK/USA

93

6

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

UK/USA

85

7

United 93

UK/USA

81

8

Match Point

UK/USA/Lux

68

9The Queen

UK/Fra/Ita

61

10

Pride and Prejudice

UK/USA48

Source: Variety.
Variety lists the gross made in 2006 and includes films released in the previous year. Some films were still being exhibited in 2007.

From left
Notes on a Scandal © 2006 DNA
Films Ltd. All rights reserved.
The Last King of Scotland© 2006 Twentieth Century Fox.
All rights reserved.
34 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

4.2 UK films in North America
According to the Motion Picture Association just under 37% of the $26 billion gross box office made worldwide in2006 came from North America, which indicates its importance in the international film market. Table 4.3 shows
the country of origin of films released in the USA and Canada in 2006. UK share of the gross box office fell from
16% in 2005 to 9% in 2006. The total revenue from these films stood at $845 million, down 36%.
Table 4.3 Country of origin of films in the USA and Canada, 2006
Numberof releases% ofreleasesBox office share%Box office$ million

UK and UK co-productions (non-USA)

46

7.7

1.6

147

UK/USA

23

3.9

7.6

698

Sub-total

69

11.6

9.2

845

USA solo

338

56.8

78.9

7,257

USA co-productions (other)

45

7.6

10.4

954

Sub-total

383

64.4

89.3

8,211

Rest of world

143

24.0

1.5

140

Total

595

100.0

100.0

9,197

Country of origin

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.

UK film’s share of the North American theatrical market fell to 9.2% in 2006, from a previous high of 15.8%
in 2005 (Table 4.4). The figure is largely dependent on the relative success of the major collaborations between
US studios and British creative talent, location and facilities.
Table 4.4 UK market share in the USA, 2002–2006
Year

UK market share
%

2006

9.2

2005

15.8

2004

11.0

2003

5.7

2002

7.2

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.

From right
United 93, distributedby Universal Pictures.
Pride and Prejudice, distributedby Universal Pictures.
4: UK films internationally | 35

The Da Vinci Code was the top performing UK film at the USA and Canada box office in 2006. The top 10 grosseda total of $730 million, down 32% on 2005 (Table 4.5).
Table 4.5 Top 20 UK films at the USA and Canada box office (including co-productions), 2006
Title

Country of origin

Box office gross$ million

Distributor

UK/USA

217.5

Sony Pictures

1

The Da Vinci Code2

Casino Royale

UK/USA/Cze

167.0

Sony Pictures

3

V for Vendetta

UK/USA/Ger

70.5

Warner Bros

4

Flushed Away

UK/USA

64.5

Paramount

5

The Queen

UK/Fra/Ita

54.3

Miramax

6

Nanny McPhee

UK/USA

47.3

Universal

7

Children of Men

UK/USA

35.1

Universal

8

United 93

UK/USA

31.6

Universal

9

The Descent

UK

26.0

Lionsgate10

Notes on a Scandal

UK

16.7

Fox Searchlight11

An American Haunting

UK/USA

16.3

Freestyle Releasing

12

The Last King of Scotland

UK/Ger15.3

Fox Searchlight13

Tristan & Isolde

UK/USA

14.7

20th Century Fox

14

Flyboys

UK/USA

13.1

MGM Studios

15

Scoop

UK/USA

10.5

Focus Features

16

DoogalUK/Fra

7.6

The Weinstein Co

17

Basic Instinct 2: Risk Addiction

UK/USA/Ger/Spa

6.0Sony Pictures

18

The Libertine

UK

4.8

The Weinstein Co

19

Goal! The Dream Begins

UK/USA

4.3

Buena Vista

20

Venus

UK

3.1

Miramax

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.
Note: Box office gross up to 4 March 2007.

4.3 UK films in Europe
UK market share in the major European territories is highlighted in Table 4.6. As in the USA and Canada, UK
market shares fell from the highs of around 20% recorded in 2005. Almost 13% of German theatrical revenues
was earned by UK films, compared with 11% in Spain and around 8% in France and Italy.
Table 4.6 UK market share in selected European territories, 2006
Box officefor UK films£ million

UK share2006%

Germany

69.6

12.8

Spain

48.0

11.1

France15.9m (admissions)

8.6

29.7

8.4

Country

Italy
Source: Nielsen EDI, Cinetel.

36 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

The top British film in Europe last year was The Da Vinci Code with 31 million admissions, followed by Casino
Royale with 23 million (Table 4.7).
Table 4.7 Top 20 UK films in European countries 2006
Title

Country of origin

Europeanadmissions
million

UK/USA

31.24

1

The Da Vinci Code2

Casino Royale

UK/USA/Cze

22.97

3

Match Point

UK/USA

6.44

4

Flushed Away

UK/USA

5.67

5

V for Vendetta

UK/USA/Ger

3.42

6

The Queen

UK/Fra/Ita

3.41

7

Nanny McPhee

UK/USA

2.83

8

United 93

UK/USA

2.72

9

Pride and Prejudice

UK/USA

2.50

10

Basic Instinct 2: Risk Addiction

UK/USA/Ger/Spa

2.45

11

The Wind that Shakes the Barley

UK/Ger/Ita/Spa/Ire

2.33

12

The Constant Gardener

UK/Ger2.11

13

Stormbreaker

UK/Ger/USA

1.82

14

Children of Men

UK/USA

1.60

15

Derailed

UK/USA

1.43

16

An American Haunting

UK/USA

0.95

17

Tristan & Isolde

UK/USA

0.90

18

The History Boys

UK

0.83

19

Severance

UK/Hun/IoM

0.52

20

Alien Autopsy

UK

0.46

Source: European Audiovisual Observatory Lumière Database.
Data based on 13 European territories up to and including 4 April 2007.

Below
Venus, courtesy of
Buena Vista International.
See also:
3 For more information on the UK andglobal market for filmed entertainment
see chapter 13 (p130)
3 For more information about the UK film economy
see chapter 16 (p160)

4: UK films internationally | 37

5: UK TALENT AND THE GLOBAL BOX OFFICE
Stories created by UK writers have dominated the global
box office over the last few years and British acting
talent has also played a starring role in many recent
blockbusters. Both help to project strong images of UK
cultural and national identity across the world.

Six of the top 10
earners worldwide
are from novelsby the British writers
JRR Tolkien and
JK Rowling“

38 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

E
H
T
S
’
E
R
E
H
W

UK acting talentfeature in morethan half of the top
200 films released
worldwide
since 2001

?
R
E
T
I
R
W
31 of the top 200
films worldwide arebased on stories andcharacters created by
UK writers and haveearned more than
$13 billion over thelast five years

British directors
have directed 19of the 200 biggest
films over the last
six years

5: UK talent and the global box office | 39

5.1 UK story material
Film is an immensely powerful medium, with the ability to project stories and images globally across cultural andnational boundaries. Stories created by UK writers have been adapted into films which have dominated the global
box office over the last six years. They have been enjoyed by millions of cinema-goers, entertaining those new tothe story material as well as those familiar with the original works. Not only do the films reflect the wealth of UK
writing talent, but they also project strong images of cultural and national identity. Classics of earlier generations
have been updated, while new characters, chief among them Harry Potter, have helped define ‘Britishness’ forwide audiences.
Worldwide box office performance is a good indicator of the international impact and exposure of UK culture
and our subsequent analysis focuses on the top 200 grossing films released worldwide between 2001 and 2006.
Twenty-six of the top 200 are British qualifying films, but UK-originated story material has played an even moresignificant role, providing the inspiration for 31 of the highest grossing films of the last six years – a featonly bettered by US story material. Some of the Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings films (based on novels
by JK Rowling and JRR Tolkien respectively) made up six of the top 10 films worldwide between 2001–2006.
Together with The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, written by CS Lewis, films
adapted from stories created by UK writers accounted for eight of the top 20 most-watched films of the last
six years (table 5.1).

40 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 5.1 Top 20 grossing films worldwide 2001–2006
Title

Country oforiginGross box
office($ million)

US Distributor

Source material(writer)

1

The Lord of the Rings:
The Return of the King

USA/NZ

1,119

New Line

Novel by JRR Tolkien

2

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest

USA

1,065

Buena Vista

Original screenplay

3

Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone

UK/USA

967

Warner Bros

Novel by JK Rowling

4

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers

USA/NZ

923

New Line

Novel by JRR Tolkien

5

Shrek 2915 Dreamworks SKG

Book by William Steig

6

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

UK/USA

892

Warner Bros

Novel by JK Rowling

7

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

UK/USA

877

Warner Bros

Novel by JK Rowling

8

The Lord of the Rings:
The Fellowship of the Ring

USA/NZ

868

New Line

Novel by JRR Tolkien

9

Finding Nemo

USA

853

Buena Vista

Original screenplay

10

Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the SithUSA

850 20th Century Fox

Original screenplay

11

Spider-Man

USA

822

Sony Pictures

Comic book by Stan Lee
and Steve Ditko

12

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

UK/USA

790

Warner Bros

Novel by JK Rowling

13

Spider-Man 2

USA

784

Sony Pictures

Comic book by Stan Lee
and Steve Ditko

14

The Da Vinci Code

UK/USA

758

Sony Pictures

Novel by Dan Brown

15

The Chronicles of Narnia:
The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe

USA/NZ

749

Buena Vista

Novel by CS Lewis

16

The Matrix Reloaded

USA

739

Warner Bros

Original screenplay

17

Ice Age 2

USA

657 20th Century Fox

Original screenplay

18

Pirates of the Caribbean:
The Curse of the Black Pearl

USA

653

Buena Vista

Original screenplay

19

Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones

USA

650 20th Century Fox

Original screenplay

20

The Incredibles

USA

632

Original screenplay

USA

Buena Vista

Source: Variety, RSU analysis.

From left
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
© Patalex IV Productions Limited.
Lord of the Rings: The Returnof the King, courtesy ofEntertainment Film Distributors.
The Chronicles of Narnia:
The Lion, the Witch andthe Wardrobe, courtesy of
Buena Vista Home Entertainment.
5: UK talent and the global box office | 41

The top 20 grossing films adapted from stories or characters created by UK writers are listed in table 5.2.
Sixteen of the titles are adapted from novels and short stories written by UK authors, two are original
screenplays, one is based on a graphic novel and another is based on situations and characters from a
best-selling computer game.
Table 5.2 Top 20 grossing films worldwide based on stories and characters created by UK writers 2001–2006
Title

Country oforiginGross box
office($ million)

US Distributor

Source material(writer)

1

The Lord of the Rings:
The Return of the King

USA/NZ

1,119

New Line

Novel by JRR Tolkien

2

Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone

UK/USA

970

Warner Bros

Novel by JK Rowling

3

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers

USA/NZ

923

New Line

Novel by JRR Tolkien

4

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

UK/USA

892

Warner Bros

Novel by JK Rowling

5

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

UK/USA

877

Warner Bros

Novel by JK Rowling

6

The Lord of the Rings:
The Fellowship of the Ring

USA/NZ

868

New Line

Novel by JRR Tolkien

7

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

UK/USA

790

Warner Bros

Novel by JK Rowling

8

The Chronicles of Narnia:
The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe

USA/NZ

749

Buena Vista

Novel by CS Lewis

9

The War of the Worlds

USA

596

Paramount

Novel by HG Wells

10

Casino Royale

UK/USA/Cze

589

Sony Pictures

Novel by Ian Fleming

11

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

UK/USA

473

Warner Bros

Novel by Roald Dahl

12

Die Another Day

UK/USA

432

MGM/UA

Based onIan Fleming novels

13

Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason

UK/USA

261

Universal

Novel by Helen Fielding

14

Borat: Cultural Learnings...

259 20th Century Fox

Original screenplay by
Sacha Baron Cohen,Peter Baynham,
Anthony Hines,
Dan Mazer

15

Bridget Jones’s Diary

16

Lara Croft: Tomb Raider

17

Love Actually

18

Rank

USA

UK/USA254

Miramax

Novel by Helen Fielding

UK/USA/Jap/Ger

251

Paramount

Computer gamecharacter createdby Toby Gard

UK/USA

245

Universal

Original screenplay by
Richard Curtis

A.I. Artificial Intelligence

USA

237

Warner Bros

Based on a short story
by Brian Aldiss

19

Constantine

USA

230

Warner Bros

Based on graphic novel
by Garth Ennis
and Jamie Delano

20

Master and Commander:
The Far Side of the WorldUSA

210 20th Century Fox

Novel by Patrick O’Brian

Source: Variety, RSU analysis.

42 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Of the 31 films from the top 200 based on UK stories and characters, the majority (58%) were based on novels(written by JRR Tolkien, JK Rowling, CS Lewis, Ian Fleming, Roald Dahl, Helen Fielding, HG Wells, Patrick O’Brian,Hugh Lofting and Brian Aldiss) (Figure 5.1). The international popularity of UK comedy writing was highlighted
by the success of original screenplays for Johnny English, Borat: Cultural Learnings..., Love Actually and Wallace& Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit. Films based on British graphic novels, such as Constantine, The Leagueof Extraordinary Gentlemen and V for Vendetta also had a global impact, as did the computer game Tomb Raider
in its two film spin-offs.
Figure 5.1 Origin of UK story material in the top 200 films at the international box office 2001–2006
Re-make 3%

Computer game 7%
Comic book/graphic novel 10%
Musical 3%

Novel 58%
Original screenplay 19%

5.2 UK actors
More than half – 105 – of the top 200 films at the international box office since 2001 featured British acting talentin either lead/title roles (24) or in the supporting cast (81). Many of the top 20 global box office hits in Table 5.1
have featured ensemble casts and British actors have played prominent roles in most of these. This is reflected
in Figure 5.2, which shows the top 15 British actors based on appearances in the 200 highest-grossing films
released globally since 2001. By playing the roles of Legolas in Lord of the Rings and Will Turner in Pirates of the
Caribbean, Orlando Bloom has featured in two of the biggest franchises in cinema history. Furthermore, the leadrole in Kingdom of Heaven and a supporting role in Troy means that Bloom has starred in films which havegrossed over $5 billion at the worldwide box office. Another of the Fellowship of Ring, Ian McKellen, hasappeared in the X-Men series as well as last year’s The Da Vinci Code. Christopher Lee has appeared in
top-grossing films for decades and recent roles in Star Wars, Lord of the Rings and Charlie and the
Chocolate Factory has continued this success. A newer generation of internationally-recognised British
actors is represented by Daniel Radcliffe and his Harry Potter co-stars and Keira Knightley.
Figure 5.2 Top UK actors featured in the top 200 films at the worldwide box office 2001–2006(number of appearance in brackets)
Total gross box office ($ billion)
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00

Total grossbox office($ billion)

5.34

er
Le
Da
e
ni
(5
Em el
)
R
Ru m adpe a W cli
frt a fe
G tso /
rin n
Be
t( /
rn
4)
ar
d
Hi
Ew
ll
an
(4
)
M
cG
re
go
Ke
r(
ira
6)
Kn
ig
ht
le
y
(4
Se
)
an
Be
an
(4
)
Br
ia
n
Co
x
Ra
(5
lp
)
h
Fi
en
ne
Ka
s(
te
4)
Be
ck
in
sa
le
(4
)
Ju
de
La
w
Bo
(6
)
nh
am H
e
Ca le
rt na
er
Da
(3
ni
)
el
Cr
ai
g
Hu
(3
)
gh
G
ra
nt
(4
)

Ch

ris
to

ph

el
le
n
M
cK

Ia
n

O

rla
nd

o

Bl
oo
m

(7

)

0

(7
)

1.00

4.71

3.76

3.53

2.35

2.26

2.16

1.93

1.64

1.44

1.2

1.19

1.02

1

0.96

Source: UK Film Council RSU.
Based on three or more appearances either in lead or supporting role in the top 200 films.

5: UK talent and the global box office | 43

5.3 UK directors
Of the 200 highest-grossing films at the worldwide box office, 19 have been directed by British directors.
Figure 5.3 and Table 5.3 show the top directors and their films. Ridley Scott was the most prolific, with threefilms (Kingdom of Heaven, Hannibal and Black Hawk Down) in the top 200, grossing over $700 million between
them. Mike Newell became the first British director of the Harry Potter franchise when he directed Harry Potter
and the Goblet of Fire and Christopher Nolan has gone on to direct the latest instalments of Batman after
building his reputation on films such as Memento and Insomnia. Two female British directors feature in
the top 200 list – Sharon Maguire and Beeban Kidron – for Bridget Jones’s Diary and Bridget Jones:
The Edge of Reason respectively.
Figure 5.3 Top 10 UK directors based on top 200 grossing films 2001–2006(number of films in brackets)
Gross box office ($ million)
1,000
800

600
400

44 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

261

254

245

St

ew

ev
e
Ni Box
ck a
Pa nd
rk
(1
)

itt
(1
)

1)

Ri
ch
ar
d

251

Pe
te
rH

Cu
rt

is
(

(1
)
es
t
W
on
Si
m

M
ag
ui
re

Ki
dr
on

288

Sh
ar
on

372

Be
eb
an

en
gr
G
re

he
rN
op

719

(1
)

(1
)
as
s

(1
)
ol
an

ot
t
Sc

Pa
ul

892

Ch
ris
t

Gross
box office($ million)

Ri
dl
ey

M
ik
e

Ne
w
el

l(

(3
)

1)

0

(1
)

200

200

186

Table 5.3 UK directors at the global box office 2001–2006 and their films
Total grossbox office($ million)

Director

Film(s)Mike Newell

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

892

Ridley ScottBlack Hawk Down, Hannibal, Kingdom of Heaven

719

Christopher Nolan

Batman Begins

372

Paul Greengrass

The Bourne Supremacy

288

Beeban Kidron

Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason

261

Sharon Maguire

Bridget Jones’s Diary

254

Simon West

Lara Croft: Tomb Raider

251

Richard Curtis

Love Actually

245Peter Hewitt

Garfield

200

Steve Box and Nick Park

Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit

186

Stephen Norrington

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen

180David Bowers and Sam Fell

Flushed Away175

Tony Scott

Déjà vu

175

Anthony Minghella

Cold Mountain173

Paul WS Anderson

Alien vs Predator

162

Peter Howitt

Johnny English

158

Peter Chelsom

Shall We Dance?

148

Source: UK Film Council RSU.

From leftOrlando Bloom in The Lordof the Rings: The Returnof the King, courtesy ofEntertainment Film Distributors
Keira Knightley in Pirates of the
Caribbean: The Curse of theBlack Pearl, courtesy of Buena VistaHome Entertainment.

See also:
3 For more details on the film distribution sector
in 2006 see chapter 8 (p72)
3 For more information about the exhibition sector
in 2006 see chapter 9 (p78)
3 For more background on film production in 2006
see chapter 14 (p138)

Ian McKellen in The Da Vinci Code© Sony Pictures Releasing.
5: UK talent and the global box office | 45

The international release
rate of British films
certified between 2000
and 2005 improved
from 60% to 70%“L E
British films weremore likely to bereleased in the UK,
Ireland andinternationally than
UK co-productions

T’S
GET
T

HIS

Almost 100% of UK
studio films have achieved
an international theatricalrelease compared with just
57% for independent
UK films

6: RELEASE HISTORY OF UK FILMS
The cinema release of a feature film has an important
influence on its performance in later release windows.
It helps create a buzz around the film that echoes
through its subsequent releases in ancillary markets,
such as retail and rental DVD and video-on-demand.
However, not all UK films get the chance to betheatrically released internationally or even locally.
46 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Almost half of
the UK films certified(2000–2005) and
60.2% of UK films
accounting for 71.8%
of total UK film budgets
were released
have been released ininternationally accounting
the UK and Irelandfor 82.3% of total UK
film budgets

ON
SCR
EEN
International UK film
releases increased as aproportion of international
release opportunities
6: Release history of UK films | 47

6.1 UK films released in the UK and the Republic of Ireland
In this chapter, a UK film is defined as one that:• qualified as British under Schedule 1 of the Films Act 1985 (Schedule 1); or• a co-production made under one of the UK’s official international co-production treaties or the European
Convention on Cinematographic Co-production (Co-pro).
We restrict our analysis to the years of certification from 2000 to 2005 due to availability of historical data andthe fact that it may take a number of years before a certified film is theatrically released. As of 4 March 2007,
the median elapsed time from certification to a UK release was 153 days over this six-year period. It should be
noted that the two types of certification considered here are not pre-conditions to the UK release of a UK film.
In fact, 59 (6.8%) of the 871 certified UK films included in this analysis were theatrically released before receiving
their certification.
Here a film is considered to be theatrically released if it was recorded as such on the multi-territory Nielsen EDI
box office database. This database covers 12 territories including the UK and the Republic of Ireland which areconsidered as one territory. Short films, re-releases, releases in film festivals and films with budgets of less than£100,000 have been excluded from this analysis.
It should be borne in mind that the number of effective theatrical release slots each year is tightly constrained(there being only 52 weekends per year) and films can also be released on DVD/video, shown on televisionor downloaded.
Out of 871 UK films certified between 2000 and 2005, only 414 (47.5%) had been theatrically released in the
UK and the Republic of Ireland by 4 March 2007, as shown in Table 6.1. Films certified in 2003 had the lowest
release rate (43.7%) while those certified in 2005 had a release rate of 48.8%, slightly above the average for thewhole period.
Table 6.1 UK films released in the UK and Republic of Ireland, certification years 2000–2005
2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Total

68

54

61

69

79

83

414

% released

52.7

45.4

49.2

43.7

46.2

48.8

47.5

Number of films certified

129

119

124

158

171

170

871

Number of films released

Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, RSU analysis.
Release rates up to 4 March 2007.

Generally speaking, bigger budget films were more likely to be released. In 2000 to 2005, films that had atheatrical release in the UK and Republic of Ireland accounted for 72% of the total budgets of UK films. Table 6.2
shows the gradual increase (except for 2003) in the proportions of budgets spent on UK films that were releasedin the UK and the Republic of Ireland.
Table 6.2 Total budget (£ million) of UK films released in the UK and Republic of Ireland, certification years
2000–2005
2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Total

Budget of released films£ million

306

566

725

468

1,378

1,239

4,681

% of total budget

68.6

67.8

70.4

61.8

75.6

75.9

71.8

Total budget £ million

445

834

1,031

756

1,822

1,632

6,520

Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, RSU analysis.
Release rates up to 4 March 2007.

48 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

6.1.1 Types of certification: Schedule 1 and co-production
Schedule 1 films certified between 2000 and 2005 were more likely to be theatrically released in the UK or
Republic of Ireland than co-productions. Figure 6.1 shows that the co-production release rate declined whilethat of Schedule 1 films rose from 2003. This was despite co-productions having higher median budgets than
Schedule 1 films over this period, as shown in Figure 6.2.
Figure 6.1 UK Schedule 1 and co-production films released in the UK and Republic of Ireland,
certification years 2000–2005% released
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Year of certification
54.7

48.6

52.9

48.6

62.5

67.7

Co-production 43.5

40.0

44.4

39.3

34.3

37.1

Schedule 1

Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, RSU Analysis.

Figure 6.2 Median budget of UK Schedule 1 and co-production films released in the UK and
Republic of Ireland, certification years 2000–2005
Median budget (£ million)
10
8
6
4
2
0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Year of certification
3.22

3.55

4.21

2.82

4.25

4.71

Co-production 5.01

4.71

8.65

5.03

9.97

6.62

Schedule 1

Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, RSU Analysis.
Release rates up to 4 March 2007.
The drop in median budget in the certification year 2003 is likely to have been caused by the fall in the number of higher-budget inward investment
co-productions in 2002 (see Figure 14.1). Films produced in 2002 would tend to have been certified in 2003.

6: Release history of UK films | 49

6.1.2 UK majority and minority co-productions
The theatrical release rates of UK co-production films also varied by the UK share of the total investment in thefilms. Here we define a UK majority co-production as one whose UK share of the total investment is equal to or
over 50%; it is referred to as a UK minority co-production otherwise. Over the years of certification from 2000 to
2005, there were 89 (21.7%) UK majority co-productions out of a total of 410 UK co-productions. Figure 6.3
shows that UK majority co-production films were more likely to be theatrically released in the UK and Republic of
Ireland than UK minority co-productions throughout the six-year period.
Figure 6.3 Release rate of UK majority and minority co-production films in the UK and Republic of Ireland,
certification years 2000–2005% released
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Year of certification
75.0
Majority(>= 50% total
investment)

63.6

54.5

47.4

64.7

60.9

26.7

32.4

41.9

36.9

28.0

30.5

Minority(<50% total
investment)

Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, RSU Analysis.
Release rates up to 4 March 2007.

6.1.3 Independent and studio films
UK studio films, that is certified UK films whose production involved a major US studio, were much more
likely to receive a theatrical release in the UK and Republic of Ireland than those without. The six US major
studios considered in this analysis are Warner Brothers, Universal, 20th Century Fox, Paramount, Disney andSony/Columbia/MGM. For the purpose of this analysis, UK films produced by Working Title are also counted
as UK studio films because of its ownership by Universal. We restrict this part of the analysis to the certification
years of 2004 to 2005 only because information on US studio involvement is incomplete before that date.
Table 6.3 shows that, of the UK films certified in 2004 and 2005, over 90% of UK studio films were theatricallyreleased in the UK and Republic of Ireland while the release rate for UK independent films was just over 40%.
Three UK studio films from these two years (Ripley Under Ground, Chasing Liberty and A Sound of Thunder)
remained un-released in the UK or the Republic of Ireland by March 2007. The latter two (certified in 2004) had
been released in other territories including the USA.
Table 6.3 Percentage of UK independent and studio films released in the UK and Republic of Ireland,
certification years 2004–2005
2004

2005

Total

Independent films (%)

40.4

44.2

42.3

Studio films (%)

90.0

93.8

91.7

Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, UKFC International, RSU analysis.
Release rates up to 4 March 2007.

50 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

A further breakdown of the figures for UK independent films reveals a similar pattern to UK films as a whole.
Independent Schedule 1 films were much more likely to be theatrically released in the UK and Republic of Irelandthan independent co-productions for the certification years 2004 and 2005, as shown in Table 6.4. The higher
release rate of Schedule 1 films is therefore not explained by the fact that UK studio films tend to be Schedule 1
films but is a broader attribute of UK Schedule 1 films.
Table 6.4 Percentage of UK independent Schedule 1 and co-production films released in the UK and
Republic of Ireland, certification years 2004–2005
2004

2005

Total

Schedule 1 (%)

55.7

63.0

59.1

Co-production (%)

30.0

34.0

32.1

Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, UKFC International, RSU analysis.
Release rates up to 4 March 2007.

6.2 UK films released internationallyIn this section, we consider the theatrical releases of UK films in 12 international territories for which box officedata are available from Nielsen EDI. The 12 Nielsen EDI territories are the USA and Canada (considered as one
territory), Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, UK and the Republic of Ireland (one territory), Spain, Germany, Austria,
France, Australia, and New Zealand. These 12 territories accounted for approximately 67% of the box officeworldwide in 2006 (Screen Digest Cinema Intelligence).
Table 6.5 shows that over the years of certification from 2000 to 2005 the release rates of UK films in at least oneof the 12 Nielsen EDI territories (including the UK and Republic of Ireland) fluctuated at about 60%.
Table 6.5 UK films released in any of 12 Nielsen EDI territories, certification years 2000–2005
2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Total

77

65

77

95

105

105

524

% released

59.7

54.6

62.1

60.1

61.4

61.8

60.2

Number of films certified

129

119

124

158

171

170

871

Number of films released

Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, RSU analysis.
Release rates up to 4 March 2007.

Over the same period, 82% of the total budgets of UK films were spent on those films that received international
releases (in at least one of 12 Nielsen EDI territories). Table 6.6 shows that the proportions of budgets associatedwith international releases hovered about the 80% level over the six-year period. This table, together with
Table 6.2, provides some reassurance that the great majority of UK film budgets (and the tax incentives associatedwith those budgets) are devoted to films that gain a theatrical release.
Table 6.6 Total budget (£ million) of UK films released in any of 12 Nielsen EDI territories,
certification years 2000–2005
2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Total

Budget of released films£ million

348

629

862

583

1,572

1,370

5,364

% of total budget

78.1

75.4

83.7

77.1

86.3

83.9

82.3

Total budget £ million

445

834

1,031

756

1,822

1,632

6,520

Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, RSU analysis.
Release rates up to 4 March 2007.

6: Release history of UK films | 51

6.2.1 Types of certification: Schedule 1 and co-production
Figure 6.4 shows that UK co-production films were more likely than Schedule 1 films to be theatrically released
internationally (in at least one of the 12 Nielsen EDI territories) between the certification years 2000 and 2003.
From 2004 onwards Schedule 1 films became more likely than co-production films to be internationally released.
Together with the data shown in Figure 6.1, this indicates that UK Schedule 1 films were more likely than UK
co-production films to be theatrically released in the UK and Republic of Ireland as well as internationally for the2004 and 2005 certification years.
Figure 6.4 Release rate of UK Schedule 1 and co-production films in any of the 12 Nielsen territories,
certification years 2000–2005% released
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Year of certification
58.5

48.6

58.6

56.8

65.3

70.8

Co-production 65.2

64.4

66.7

63.1

58.6

56.2

Schedule 1

Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, RSU Analysis.
Release rates up to 4 March 2007.

Figure 6.5 shows that the median budgets of UK Schedule 1 and co-production films rose over the period 2000 to
2005, though there was a significant fluctuation in 2002 to 2004. The median budgets of UK co-productions
remained higher than those of UK Schedule 1 films throughout this period, though with a smaller margin than in
the case of films released in the UK and Republic of Ireland (Figure 6.2).
The differences between Schedule 1 films and UK co-productions in terms of both budget and release rates
are narrower for international releases, but interestingly this has not reversed the higher release rate for
Schedule 1 films in 2004 and 2005. This suggests that good domestic UK films can be more marketableinternationally than films with a number of international partners.

Right
Gosford Park, courtesy ofEntertainment Film Distributors.
52 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Figure 6.5 Median budget of UK Schedule 1 and co-production films released in any of 12 Nielsen EDI
territories, certification years 2000–2005
Median budget (£ million)
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Year of certification
3.22

3.55

4.91

3.40

4.79

4.71

Co-production 3.95

4.88

6.78

3.88

6.70

5.92

Schedule 1

Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, RSU Analysis.
Release rates up to 4 March 2007.

6.2.2 UK majority and minority co-productions
UK majority co-production films were more likely than UK minority co-production films to be theatrically released
internationally in the certification years 2000 to 2005, as shown in Figure 6.6. The pattern is similar to that of
Figure 6.3 for UK and Republic of Ireland releases, except for 2003 when UK minority co-productions were equally
likely to be internationally released as UK majority co-productions.
Figure 6.6 UK majority and miniority co-production films released in any of 12 Nielsen EDI territories,
certification years 2000–2005% released
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Year of certification
87.5
Majority(>= 50% total
investment)

81.8

72.7

63.2

76.5

78.3

53.3

58.8

65.1

63.1

54.9

50.0

Minority(<50% total
investment)

Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, RSU Analysis.
Release rates up to 4 March 2007.

6: Release history of UK films | 53

6.2.3 Independent and studio films
Over half (57%) of UK independent films received international releases (in at least one of the 12 Nielsen EDI
territories) compared with almost guaranteed (close to 100%) international releases of UK studio films (defined as
UK films with US studio involvement) over the certification years 2004 to 2005, as shown in Table 6.7. One UK
studio film certified in 2005 (Ripley Under Ground) remained un-released in any of the 12 Nielsen EDI territories byMarch 2007. This film had been screened at a film festival in the USA in November 2005, according to IMDB
(www.imdb.com), but no other future release dates could be identified from the same source.
Table 6.7 Percentage of UK independent and studio films released in any of 12 Nielsen EDI territories,
certification years 2004–2005
2004

2005

Total

Independent films %

56.3

58.4

57.4

Studio films %

100.0

93.8

97.2

Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, UKFC International, RSU analysis.
Release rates up to 4 March 2007.

6.3 Release opportunities analysis
In the following analysis, release opportunities are defined as the number of films multiplied by the numberof territories in which these films could be released. For example, if there were 100 films to be released in
12 territories, there would be 1,200 release opportunities. The following analysis examines the extent to which
UK films were able to exploit these release opportunities for the certification years from 2000 to 2005.
Table 6.8 shows that UK films were able to exploit 24.3% of the release opportunities in the 12 Nielsen EDI
territories for the 2000 to 2005 certification years.
Table 6.8 Release opportunities of UK films, certification years 2000–2005
2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Total

% of opportunities
exploited

20.7

21.1

28.3

20.1

28.9

25.7

24.3

Number of release
opportunities

1,548

1,428

1,488

1,896

2,052

2,040

10,452

129

119

124

158

171

170

871

Number of films certified
Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, RSU analysis.
Release rates up to 4 March 2007.

Over this period there was a slight overall increase in the percentage of release opportunities exploited as shownin Figure 6.7 suggesting that the quality and/or marketing of UK films might have improved over the period.

54 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Figure 6.7 Release opportunities of UK films, certification years 2000–2005% of opportunities exploited
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

20.1

28.9

25.7

Year of certification
20.7

21.1

28.3

Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, RSU Analysis.
Release rates up to 4 March 2007.

It would have been informative to compare our findings with those from other comparable-sized countries,
however we have not seen similar results published elsewhere.
6.3.1 Types of certification: Schedule 1 and co-production
Figure 6.8 reveals that UK Schedule 1 films were more successful than UK co-production films at exploiting release
opportunities in the years of certification 2004 and 2005. The rates were similar from 2000 to 2002.
Figure 6.8 Release opportunities of UK Schedule 1 and co-production films, certification years 2000–2005% of opportunities exploited
40

30

20

10

0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Year of certification
20.3

20.7

28.3

16.8

31.9

33.8

Co-production 22.8

21.7

28.2

23.1

26.8

20.7

Schedule 1

Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, RSU Analysis.
Release rates up to 4 March 2007.

From left
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
© Patalex IV Productions Limited.
Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason,
distributed by Universal Pictures.
6: Release history of UK films | 55

6.3.2 UK majority and minority co-productions
Overall, UK majority (UK share of investment equal to or above 50%) co-productions were more successful at
exploiting release opportunities than UK minority co-productions over the certification years 2000 to 2005, asshown in Figure 6.9. This was except for 2002 and 2003 when UK minority co-productions achieved a higher
proportion of release opportunities than UK majority co-productions.
Figure 6.9 Release opportunities of UK majority and minority co-production films,
certification years 2000–2005% of opportunities exploited
50
40
30
20
10
0

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Year of certification
41.7
Majority(>= 50% total
investment)

39.4

28.0

18.9

47.5

32.2

12.8

15.9

28.3

24.4

22.5

17.5

Minority(<50% total
investment)

Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, RSU Analysis.
Release rates up to 4 March 2007.

6.3.3 Independent and studio films
Table 6.9 shows that over the certification years 2004 and 2005 UK independent films only exploited 20.8% of therelease opportunities compared with 82.4% by UK studio films (UK films whose production involved a US studio).
Table 6.9 Releases as a percentage of release opportunities for UK independent and studio films,
certification years 2004–2005
2004

2005

Total

Independent films (%)

22.2

19.5

20.8

Studio films (%)

80.0

85.4

82.4

Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, UKFC International, RSU analysis.
Release rates up to 4 March 2007.

While the above figures for independent UK films seem low, it should be recalled that the number of effective
theatrical release slots each year is tightly constrained (there being only 52 weekends per year) and films can also
be released on DVD/video, shown on television or downloaded.

From left
Bend it like Beckham, courtesy ofLions Gate UK. All rights reserved.
Love Actually, distributedby Universal Pictures.
56 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

6.4 Financial success analysis
It is difficult to measure the overall profitability of UK films. However, a proxy measure such as the ratio of
multi-territory box office to budget can be a useful indicator. Industry feedback suggests that if a low- to
medium-budget British film generates box office revenues greater than twice its budget in the 12 Nielsen
territories it is likely to be in profit by the time returns from ancillary revenues are added to its income stream.
Below that level its probability of making a profit drops rapidly. Figure 6.10 shows the budget to box office ratio
by budget of UK films certified between 2000 and 2005 that had gained a theatrical release by 4 March 2007.
Over this period only 46 (8.8%) out of the 524 certified UK films released internationally (in at least one of the
12 Nielsen EDI territories) achieved a ratio of multi-territory box office to budget of two or above. This suggeststhat only a small proportion of internationally-released UK feature films are likely to have made profits for the
producers and investors in the film and underlines the highly risky nature of film investment.
Figure 6.10 Multi-territory box office/budget ratio by budget of UK films, certification years 2000–2005
Box office/budget ratio
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0

50

100

150

200

Budget (£ million)
Box office/budget of a UK film ratio
Source: Nielsen EDI, DCMS, RSU analysis.
Figures as at 4 March 2007.

See also:
3 For cinema admissions and box office in 2006
see chapter 1 (p10)
3 For UK films on video see chapter 10 (p96)
3 For UK films on TV see chapter 11 (p112)
3 For US studio involvement in UK film production
in 2006 see chapter 14 (p138)

6: Release history of UK films | 57

7: LANGUAGE, GENRE AND CLASSIFICATION
Film culture in the UK is increasingly diverse.
The record number of films on release in 2006 gaveaudiences access to the best cinema from acrossthe globe, in 30 different languages, as well as
films varying in subject matter, genre and style.

Comedy,traditionally popular,
accounted for 24%
of releases and took
Drama made up the
27% of thehighest proportion ofbox officereleases (30.5%) but
only 10% of the total
box office

S
I
M
L
I
“F

58 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

L
A
S
R
E
V
I
N
U
A

Foreign language
films accounted forover a third of UK
releases but just 3.5%of the box officeMore ‘15’ certificate
films were released thanany other category but‘12A’ films accounted
for the largest box
office share

Hindi was themost common
foreign language
in films released

E
G
A
U
G
N
A
L
Films in30 different
languages werereleased in
the UK

171 foreign
language films
were released,
33.9% of all films
7: Language, genre and classification | 59

7.1 Foreign language films
Films in 30 different languages including English were released in the UK in 2006 as Table 7.1 shows, a decrease
from 33 in 2005.
Table 7.1 Languages of films released, 2006
Language

Number of releases

Arabic3 Persian2

Cantonese

6 Portuguese

2

Danish

2 Punjabi

7

English334 Romanian

1

Farsi

1 Russian3

Finnish1 Serbo-Croatian1

French29 Spanish

10

German6 Swedish

2

Hindi

50 Tamil

15

Hungarian

2 Thai

1

Italian

3 Turkish

9Japanese

4 Xhosa

1

Korean2 Yiddish1

Mandarin

4 Zulu1

Mongolian

1 Total505

Nigerian

1

Language

Number of releases

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.

The 29 foreign languages were spread over 171 releases in the UK (33.9% of all releases, an increase of 30.5%
since 2002), earning £29.8 million at the box office (Table 7.2). This represented 3.5% of the total UK gross box
office for 2006, a fall from 4.6% in 2004 but higher than in 2005.
Table 7.2 Foreign language films at the UK box office, 2002–2006
Number of
releases% of
all releases

Box office(£ million)% oftotal grossbox office

2002

131

35.5

17.1

2.2

2003

147

34.7

20.4

2.5

2004

169

37.5

38.1

4.6

2005

203

43.5

26.9

3.2

2006

171

33.9

29.8

3.5

Source: Nielsen EDI, BBFC, RSU analysis.
Figures as at 4 March 2007.

60 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Figure 7.1 shows that the percentage of foreign films released in the UK had dropped to a lower level than in
2002. This was despite the fact that a higher number of foreign films had been released this year than in 2002.
This drop could be partly explained by the higher rate of increase in the total number of releases than in foreign
films released between 2002 and 2006. The total number of films released rose from 369 in 2002 to 505 in 2006,
an increase of 36.9% compared with the 30.5% increase in foreign films released over the same time.
Figure 7.1 Percentage of foreign language films of all films released in the UK, 2002–2006% of all releases
50

40
30
20
10
0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Hindi was once again the most common foreign language in terms of the number of releases (Table 7.3).
Taken together foreign language films played on average at only 17 sites at their widest point of release(against 15 in 2005) compared with an average of 162 for English language releases. Table 7.4 shows the
top five foreign languages, with Hindi again in top position and Spanish second.
Table 7.3 Language of releases, 2006
Number of
releases% ofreleasesGrossbox office(£ million)% grossbox office

Average sites
at widest pointof release

English

334

66.1

815.5

96.5

162

Hindi

50

9.9

15.2

1.8

25

European

62

12.3

10.4

1.2

16

Other international

59

11.7

4.2

0.5

12

Total

505

100.0

845.3

100.0

113

Number of
releasesGrossbox office(£ million)

Top performing title

Hindi

50

15.2

Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna

Spanish10

5.6

VolverFrench29

3.9

Hidden (Caché)

Mandarin

4

1.3

Fearless

Zulu

1

0.8

Tsotsi

Main language

Source: Nielsen EDI, BBFC, RSU analysis.
Figures as at 4 March 2007. Figures may not sum to totals due to rounding.

Table 7.4 Top five foreign languages at the UK box office, 2006

Source: Nielsen EDI, BBFC, RSU analysis.
Figures as at 4 March 2007.

7: Language, genre and classification | 61

Table 7.5 looks at European language releases in 2006 and shows the top three performing languages were
Spanish, French and German. Spanish-language films included films from South America as well as Spain andthe two Portuguese-language films were of Brazilian origin.
Table 7.5 European foreign languages at the UK box office, 2006
Number of
releasesGrossbox office(£ million)

Top performing title

Spanish10

5.6

VolverFrench29

3.9

Hidden (Caché)

German6

0.7

The Little Polar Bear 2

Italian3

0.1

Romanzo Criminale

Romanian1<0.1

The Death of Mr Lazarescu

Hungarian2<0.1

Fateless

Portuguese

2

<0.1

Favela Rising

Russian3<0.1

King Lear

Danish2<0.1

Terkel in Trouble

Finnish1<0.1

Frozen Land

Serbo-Croatian

1

<0.1

Esma’s Secret

Swedish2<0.1

Frostbite

Source: Nielsen EDI, BBFC, RSU analysis.
Figures as at 4 March 2007.

From left
Volver, courtesy of
Pathé Pictures International.
Terkel in Trouble, courtesy of
Eureka Entertainment.
62 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

While the top two foreign language films in 2006 were in Spanish, the top 20 as a whole was dominated byHindi films, which accounted for 14 titles (Table 7.6).
Table 7.6 Top 20 foreign language films released in the UK and Republic of Ireland, 2006
Title

Country of origin

Grossbox office(£ million)

Distributor

Language

Spa

2.9

Pathé

SpanishMex/Spa/USA

2.6

Optimum

Spanish1

Volver2

Pan’s Labyrinth

3

Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna

Ind

2.1

Yash Raj

Hindi

4

Hidden (Caché)Fra

1.4 Artificial Eye

French

5

Don

Ind

1.4

UTV

Hindi

6

Fanaa

Ind

1.2

Yash Raj

Hindi

7

Dhoom 2

Ind

1.2

Yash Raj

Hindi

8

Fearless

HK/USA/Chi

1.2

UIP

Mandarin

9

BaabulInd

0.9

AdlabsHindi

10Rang De Basanti

Ind

0.8

UTV

Hindi

11

Lage Raho Munnabhai

Ind

0.8

Eros

Hindi

12

TsotsiS. Africa/UK

0.8 Momentum

Zulu

13

KrrishInd

0.7

AdlabsHindi

14

The Little Polar Bear 2Ger

0.5 Warner Bros

German15

Bhagam Bhaag

Ind

0.5

Venus

Hindi

16

Jaan-E-Mann

Ind

0.5

AdlabsHindi

17

Humko Deewana Kar Gaye

Ind

0.5

UTV

Hindi

18

Phir Hera Pheri

Ind

0.5

Tip Top

Hindi

19

Umrao Jaan

Ind

0.4

Adlabs

Hindi

20

Chup Chup Ke

Ind

0.3

UTV

Hindi

Source: Nielsen EDI, BBFC, RSU analysis.
Figures as at 4 March 2007.

The release of a number of films in the top 20 was supported by the UK Film Council. Four of the titles (Volver,
Pan’s Labyrinth, Hidden and Tsotsi) received funding to pay for additional prints and advertising, providing agreater opportunity for people to see the films.

From left
Don, courtesy of UTV Motionpictures.
Pan’s Labyrinth, courtesy of Optimum
Home Entertainment 2007.
7: Language, genre and classification | 63

7.2 Genre
For statistical purposes, the Research and Statistics Unit allocated a primary genre to every film released in the
UK in 2006. The list of genres is based on conventions commonly used within the industry and by publishedsources. The full list of genres and classification of each title released in 2006 is available on our website(http://www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk/information/statistics/genre-titles/).
Table 7.7 provides an indication of the relative popularity of different genres. Comedy was once again the
top-grossing genre at the UK box office (earning £230.9 million), followed by action (£158.2 million) andanimation (£137 million). Despite accounting for the largest proportion of releases (30.5%), drama films
shared only 10.1% of the box office gross.
Table 7.7 Films on release in the UK and Republic of Ireland by genre, 2006, ranked by gross box office
Number of
releases% ofreleasesGrossbox office(£ million)% ofbox office

Comedy

122

24.2

230.9

27.3

Borat:
Cultural Learnings…

Action

50

9.9

158.2

18.7

Casino Royale

Animation

21

4.2

137.0

16.2

Ice Age 2

Drama

154

30.5

85.5

10.1

Brokeback Mountain

Thriller

25

5.0

65.5

7.7

The Da Vinci CodeAdventure

9

1.8

58.6

6.9

Pirates of the Caribbean:
Dead Man’s Chest

Horror

24

4.8

39.8

4.7

Final Destination 3

Crime

18

3.6

28.3

3.3

The Departed

Fantasy

6

1.2

13.7

1.6

EragonBiopic

6

1.2

13.4

1.6

Walk the Line

Family

3

0.6

6.9

0.8

Garfield 2Documentary

40

7.9

3.8

0.4

Deep Sea 3-D

Romance

12

2.4

2.1

0.2

Tristan and Isolde

Musical

13

2.6

0.8

0.1

Jaan-E-Mann

War

1

0.2

0.7

0.1

Flags of our Fathers

Western

1

0.2

<0.1

<0.1

Dead Man’s Cards

Genre

Top performing title

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.

Four of the top performing films by genre originated in the UK, demonstrating the wide variety of story types ofsuccessful British films (Casino Royale, The Da Vinci Code, Tristan and Isolde and Dead Man’s Cards).

From left
The Departed, courtesy ofEntertainment Film Distributors.
Brokeback Mountain, courtesy ofEntertainment Film Distributors.
64 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 7.8 gives the pattern of genres ranked by the average number of sites at the widest point of release.
Whereas in 2005 fantasy topped the list with an average WPR of 492 across four heavily-marketed titles onwide release, the top WPR genre in 2006 was animation with an average 301 sites across 21 films.
Table 7.8 Films on release in the UK and Republic of Ireland by genre, 2006, ranked by average widest
point of release
Average number ofsites at widest
point of release

Number of
releasesGrossbox office(£ million)

Animation

301

21

137.0

Adventure

223

9

58.6

Fantasy

207

6

13.7

Thriller

175

25

65.5

Horror

167

24

39.8

Family

165

3

6.9

Action

160

50

158.2

Comedy

151

122

230.9

War

150

1

0.7

Crime

124

18

28.3

Biopic

106

6

13.4

Drama

52

154

85.5

Romance

37

12

2.1

Musical

13

13

0.8

Western

9

1

<0.1

Documentary

8

40

3.8

Genre

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.

Right
Garfield: A Tail of Two Kitties© 2006 Twentieth Century Fox.
All rights reserved.
7: Language, genre and classification | 65

Table 7.9 demonstrates what the different genres generated in box office revenues per site, which gives a good
indication of performance in the market while controlling for the size of release. Comedy, which took the largest
slice of box office overall, is much lower placed when the average widest point of release is taken into account,indicating a long tail of less able performers. Documentary, meanwhile, outperformed box office staples likefantasy and horror in this analysis.
Table 7.9 Films on release in the UK and Republic of Ireland by genre and ranked by average box officegross per site, 2006

Genre

Averagebox office
per site(£)

Grossbox office(£ million)

Total sites

Adventure

29,149

58.6

2,010

Animation

21,698

137.0

6,316

Biopic21,20313.4

634

Action19,828

158.2

7,980

Thriller

14,992

65.5

4,372

Family13,997

6.9

494

Crime

12,635

28.3

2,238

Documentary

12,571

3.8

304

Comedy12,497230.9

18,476

Fantasy

10,996

13.7

1,243

Drama

10,590

85.5

8,071

Horror

9,935

39.8

4,006

Musical

4,735

0.8

175

Romance

4,730

2.1

438

War

4,713

0.7

150

705

<0.1

9

Western
Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.
Total sites = number of films multiplied by widest point of release.

The genres of UK films released in 2006 by gross box office reflect similar rankings to that for all films released,
although there are some notable differences. For example, action blockbusters accounted for 40% of the total box
office for UK films and UK comedies performed less well than comedies in general (Table 7.10). The exceptional
performance of UK action films in 2006 was largely due to Casino Royale which made up of 84% of total box
office for UK action films.

From left
Fanaa, courtesy of Yash Raj Films.
The Death of Mr Lazarescu,
courtesy of Tartan Video.
66 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 7.10 UK films on release in the UK and Republic of Ireland by genre, and ranked by gross box office, 2006
Number of
releases% ofreleasesGrossbox office(£ million)% ofbox office

Top performing title

Action

3

2.8

65.8

40.9

Casino Royale

Thriller

10

9.3

39.4

24.5

The Da Vinci Code

Drama

42

39.3

25.2

15.7

The Queen

Comedy

23

21.5

17.0

10.5

The History Boys

Animation

2

1.9

11.2

7.0

Flushed Away

Romance

4

3.7

0.9

0.5

Tristan and Isolde

Horror

6

5.6

0.7

0.4

The Dark

Adventure

1

0.9

0.4

0.2

The Adventures ofGreyfriars Bobby

Documentary

10

9.3

0.2

0.1

Glastonbury

Family

1

0.9

0.1

0.1

Thief Lord

Fantasy

1

0.9

0.1

<0.1

Mirrormask

Crime

1

0.9

<0.1

<0.1

Rollin’ with the Nines

Western

1

0.9

<0.1

<0.1

Dead Man’s Cards

Musical

1

0.9

<0.1

<0.1

Bugsy Malone(re-release)

Biopic

1

0.9

<0.1

<0.1

The Night weCalled it a Day

Genre

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.

Dramas and thrillers formed a higher proportion of UK film releases than of all films released in the UK in2006 (Figure 7.2). Under-represented genres among UK films were action, adventure, animation and musical.
The genres of western and war have been excluded from this comparison as there was only one such releasein each of the two genres in 2006.
Figure 7.2 Proportion of releases by genre for UK films and all films, 2006
% of releases
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5

ActionAdventure

Animation

BiopicComedyCrime

Documentary

Drama

FamilyFantasy

HorrorMusicalRomanceThriller

0

9.9

1.8

4.2

1.2

24.2

3.6

7.9

30.5

0.6

1.2

4.8

2.6

2.4

5.0

% UK releases 2.8

0.9

1.9

0.9

21.5

0.9

9.3

39.3

0.9

0.9

5.6

0.9

3.7

9.3

% all releases

Source: Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.
7: Language, genre and classification | 67

7.3 Classification
All films in the UK must carry a certificate indicating their age suitability for exhibition in premises licensed forthe purpose by local authorities. The British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) classifies the majority of films fortheatrical release, although local authorities may grant their own classification.
The symbols used by the BBFC and their meanings are given in Table 7.11.
Table 7.11 BBFC film classifications
U (Universal)– Suitable for all.

PG (Parental Guidance) – General viewing, but some scenes may be unsuitable for some children.
12A– No one younger than 12 may see a ‘12A’ film at the cinema unless accompanied
by an adult.

15– No one younger than 15 may see a ‘15’ film at the cinema.

18– No one younger than 18 may see an ‘18’ film at the cinema .

Source: BBFC website.

Table 7.12 provides a picture of how 2006 releases were classified. It shows that as in previous years more
‘15’ films were released than any other category (38.8% of all releases) although they accounted for a smaller
proportion of the gross box office (21.2%). There were increases in the proportions of ‘12A’ and ‘15’ certified
films in 2006, up from 25% and 37% in 2005 to 28% and 39%.
Table 7.12 Releases in UK and Republic of Ireland by film certificate, 2006
Number of
releases% ofreleases% of grossbox office

Top performing title

U

29

5.7

13.9

Ice Age 2

PG

75

14.9

15.2

Night at the Museum

12A

139

27.5

43.9

Casino Royale

15

196

38.8

21.2

Borat: Cultural Learnings…

18

46

9.1

5.7

The Departed

No certificate

20

4.0

<0.1

Jillunu Oru Kaadhal

Total

505

100.0

100.0

Certificate

Source: Nielsen EDI, BBFC, RSU analysis

From left
Tsotsi, courtesy ofMomentum Pictures.
Night at the Museum © 2006
Twentieth Century Fox.
All rights reserved.
68 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 7.13 gives the top 10 ‘U’ certified films in 2006. With seven out of 10 titles the list is dominated byanimated features (traditionally aimed at the youngest audiences for whom a ‘U’ certificate is preferable).
Only one of the 10 films had UK involvement, compared with five last year.
Table 7.13 Top 10 ‘U’ certified films, 2006
Title

Country of origin

Grossbox office(£ million)

Distributor

Genre

USA

29.6

20th Century Fox

Animation

Aus/USA

18.9

Warner Bros

Animation

1

Ice Age 22

Happy Feet3

Chicken Little

USA

13.5

Buena Vista

Animation

4

Over the Hedge

USA

13.2

UIP

Animation

5

Flushed Away

UK/USA

11.1

Paramount

Animation

6

Garfield 2

USA

6.5

20th Century Fox

Family7

The Santa Clause 3

USA

6.3

BVI

Comedy8

Hoodwinked

USA

5.8

Momentum

Animation

9

The Wild

USA

4.3

BVI

Animation

10

The Shaggy Dog

USA

2.9

BVI

ComedySource: Nielsen EDI, BBFC, RSU analysis.

The top 10 performing ‘PG’ certified films are a more varied group (Table 7.14). The table is topped by the
successful comedy, Night at the Museum. The top 10 ‘PG’ films are dominated by comedies and animations.
Table 7.14 Top 10 ‘PG’ certified films, 2006
Title

Country of origin

Grossbox office(£ million)

Distributor

Genre

1

Night at the Museum

USA

20.8

20th Century Fox

Comedy

2

Cars

USA

16.4

Buena Vista

Animation

3

The Devil Wears Prada

USA

14.0

20th Century Fox

Comedy4

Big Momma’s House 2

USA

9.2

20th Century Fox

Comedy5Open Season

USA

7.4

Sony Pictures

Animation

6

Stormbreaker

UK/Ger/USA

6.8

Entertainment

Action7

Monster House

USA

6.6

Sony Pictures

Animation

8

The Pink Panther

USA

6.0

20th Century Fox

Comedy9EragonUSA

5.6

20th Century Fox

Fantasy

10

Barnyard: the Original Party

USA

4.6

Paramount

Animation

Source: Nielsen EDI, BBFC, RSU analysis.

7: Language, genre and classification | 69

As noted in Table 7.12, the largest share of gross box office was earned by ‘12A’ films (43.9%). Traditionally thisis largely due to the success of popular family-oriented films which also managed to attract older audiences(Table 7.15). The hugely successful and relatively violent (for a ‘12A’ certificate) Bond-franchise, Casino Royale,
is somewhat of an exception. Three of the top 10 ‘12A’ films had UK involvement.
Table 7.15 Top 10 ‘12A’ certified films, 2006
Country of origin

Grossbox office(£ million)

Distributor

Genre

UK/Cze/Ger/USA

55.5

Sony Pictures

ActionUSA

52.5

Buena Vista

Adventure

UK/USA

30.4

Sony Pictures

Thriller

USA

19.2

20th Century Fox

ActionUSA/Aus

16.1

Warner Bros

ActionTitle

1Casino Royale

2

Pirates of the Caribbean:
Dead Man’s Chest

3

The Da Vinci Code4

X-Men III

5

Superman Returns

6

Mission: Impossible III

USA

15.5

UIP

Action7

The Holiday

USA

12.3

Universal Pictures

Comedy8

The Break up

USA

10.4

UIP

Comedy9Walk the Line

USA

10.4

20th Century Fox

Biopic10

The Queen

UK/Fra/Ita

9

Pathé

Drama

Source: Nielsen EDI, BBFC, RSU analysis.

By definition, ‘15’ certified films contain stronger material than the younger categories. Depending on the type offilm they are likely to involve more adult-oriented themes, action, comedy and language. This is reflected in the
top 10, shown in Table 7.16. The top 10 ‘15’ films were topped by the hit comedy featuring the character, Borat,
created by British actor, Sacha Baron Cohen. This was followed by the multiple-award winning, gay-themed
Brokeback Mountain. The rest of the list is made up of action, horror and thrillers.
Table 7.16 Top 10 ‘15’ certified films, 2006
Title

Country of origin

Grossbox office(£ million)

Distributor

Genre

1

Borat: Cultural Learnings…

USA

24.1

20th Century Fox

Comedy2

Brokeback Mountain

USA

10.1

Entertainment

Drama

3

Final Destination 3

USA

9.0

Entertainment

Horror4

The Inside Man

USA

8.3

UIP

Crime

5

Miami Vice

USA/Ger

7.5

UIP

Action6

Scary Movie 4

USA

5.9

Buena Vista

Comedy7Jarhead

USA

5.4

UIP

Drama

8

Munich

USA

5.1

UIP

Thriller

9

The Children of Men

UK/USA

4.9

Universal Pictures

Thriller

10

The OmenUSA

4.4

20th Century Fox

Horror

Source: Nielsen EDI, BBFC, RSU analysis.

70 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Because of the challenging nature of ‘18’ certified films, which contain the strongest content, their audienceappeal is generally much narrower than other categories. However, the Oscar-winning, The Departed, brokethe £10 million barrier this year (Table 7.17). Where as none of the films in this category broke this barrier in 2005.
It is followed by the third part of the horror sequel, Saw. Saw 2 was the top film in this category in 2005.
Nearly half of the top 10 ‘18’ films were horror titles, along with two action films and a mix of other genres.
Unlike 2005 (when there were five UK titles on this list) there were no UK titles among the top 10 ‘18’ films
in 2006.
Table 7.17 Top 10 ‘18’ certified films, 2006
Title

Country of origin

Grossbox office(£ million)

Distributor

Genre

1

The Departed

USA

12.8

Entertainment

Crime

2

Saw 3

USA

8.5

Lionsgate

Horror3

Lucky Number Slevin

USA

4.6

Entertainment

Thriller4

HostelUSA

4.2

Sony Pictures

Horror5

The Hills have Eyes

USA

3.6

20th Century Fox

Horror6

Underworld: Evolution

USA

3.2

Entertainment

Action7

Hard Candy

USA

1.9

Lionsgate

Drama

8

Jackass 2

USA

1.7

Paramount

Comedy9Texas Chainsaw: the Beginning

USA

1.5

Entertainment

Horror

10

Crank

USA

1.5

UIP

ActionSource: Nielsen EDI, BBFC, RSU analysis.

See also:
3 For cinema admissions and box office in 2006
see chapter 1 (p10)
3 For a look at cinema audiences
see chapter 10 (p96)
3 For information about film classification in
the UK see www.bbfc.org.uk
3 For details of local film societies that screen
foreign language films in your area see
www.bffs.org.uk
3 For further insight into what the UK Film Council
does to support specialised films see
http://www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk/cinemagoing/
distributionandexhibition/
3 For more details about genre classification see
http://www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk/information/
statistics/genre-titles/
7: Language, genre and classification | 71

Opening weekends
accounted for 27% of
the total box office

“TH
INK
OF
THE
Weekends(Friday to Sunday)
accounted for 60%of the box office

8: DISTRIBUTION
A small number of large companies dominate the
distribution of films in the UK. They invest millionsof pounds in attracting audiences to the cinema.
72 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Total advertising
spend increasedby 3.3% to£171.3 million
The top ten
distributors had
a 96% share of themarket in 2006

AUD
IEN
CE
8: Distribution | 73

8.1 Distributors in 2006
As shown in Table 8.1, the top ten distributors had a 96% share of the market, down from 97% in 2005.
The remaining 57 distributors handled a total of 295 titles (58% of the total), but gained only a 3.6% shareof the box office, up from 2.7% in 2005. The leading distributor was 20th Century Fox, which handled major hits
such as Ice Age 2, Borat, X-Men 3, The Devil Wears Prada and Walk the Line. UIP was in second place having
distributed 51 titles over the course of the year, including Mission: Impossible III, Over the Hedge and The BreakUp. Sony Pictures was in third place, having launched the year’s biggest hit, Casino Royale and also The Da Vinci
Code. Buena Vista’s hits Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest and Cars ensured fourth place. The majorchange in film distribution in 2006 was the break-up of UIP into its two constituent companies, Paramount andUniversal Pictures International in December. Because this change was so late in the year, the final market sharefor UIP in the table below includes the separate figures for Paramount and Universal recorded in December.
Table 8.1 Distributor share of box office, UK and Republic of Ireland, 2006
Marketshare (%)

Films onrelease 2006

Box officegross (£ million)

20th Century Fox

20.9

33

179.5

UIP*

18.9

51

162.6

Sony Pictures

16.1

34

138.5

Buena Vista

15.7

27

135.1

Warner Bros

8.2

25

70.8

Entertainment

7.9

22

67.5

Pathé

3.2

22

27.4

Lionsgate

2.4

24

20.3

Momentum

2.3

18

19.6

Icon

0.8

11

7.0

Sub-total

96.4

267

828.3

Others (57 distributors)

3.6

295

31.5

100.0

562

859.8

Distributor

Total

Source: Nielsen EDI.
Box office gross = cumulative box office total for all films handled by the distributor in the period 2 January 2006 to 4 January 2007.
*UIP figure includes Paramount and Universal shares from December 2006.

74 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

8.2 Distributors, 2002–2006
Table 8.2 shows that the top six distributors form a stable leading group, although their individual market sharesvary considerably from year to year, depending on the particular mix of films distributed. The share of box officemade by distributors outside the top ten increased to 3.6%.
Table 8.2 Distributor market share as percentage of box office gross, 2002–2006
Distributor

2002
%

2003
%

2004
%

2005
%

2006
%

20th Century Fox

17.9

8.8

10.7

14.3

20.9

UIP

12.5

22.5

29.8

29.1

18.9

Sony Pictures

12.3

9.7

10.0

6.8

16.1

Buena Vista

15.2

26.3

14.5

13.1

15.7

Warner Bros

15.4

10.4

14.7

18.2

8.2

Entertainment

16.6

14.6

7.9

9.4

7.9

Pathé

2.1

2.0

2.8

3.5

3.2

Lionsgate

1.7

0.7

1.0

0.3

2.4

Momentum

1.9

1.3

2.2

1.9

2.3

Icon

0.9

0.7

2.3

0.2

0.8

Top 10 total*

96.8

97.1

96.1

97.3

96.4

Others

3.2

2.9

3.9

2.7

3.6

Total

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

Source: Nielsen EDI.
*Top 10 total refers to the top 10 distributors of that particular year. Table is ranked by top 10 distributors in 2006.

From left
Ice Age 2 © 2006 Twentieth Century Fox.
All rights reserved.
Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for makeBenefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan © 2006
Twentieth Century Fox. All rights reserved.
Mission: Impossible III, courtesy of
Paramount Pictures.
Cars, courtesy of Buena Vista Home Entertainment.
Walk the Line © 2005 Twentieth Century Fox.
All rights reserved.
8: Distribution | 75

8.3 Weekend box office
In 2006, 60% of the box office was taken at weekends (Friday to Sunday), down from 64% in 2005,
as Table 8.3 shows.
Table 8.3 Box office percentage share by weekday/weekend, 2002–2006
2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Friday

16.9

16.0

15.3

18.0

16.5

Saturday

29.4

26.6

24.5

27.0

25.1

Sunday

21.3

18.7

19.9

19.0

18.7

Weekend

67.6

61.3

59.7

64.0

60.3

Monday

7.2

8.9

9.7

8.0

9.5

Tuesday

8.5

10.0

10.1

8.0

9.5

Wednesday

8.6

9.8

10.7

10.0

10.9

Thursday

8.1

10.0

9.8

10.0

9.7

Weekday

32.4

38.7

40.3

36.0

39.7

Total

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

Source: Nielsen EDI.

The opening weekend box office as a share of total theatrical revenue increased slightly in 2006 as shownin Table 8.4.
Table 8.4 UK opening weekend as percentage of total box office, 2005–06% of total
in opening
weekend 2005

% of total
in opening
weekend 2006

All films

26.3

26.5

More than £30 million

27.2

26.4

£20 million – £30 million

25.9

31.8

£10 million – £29.9 million

23.4

23.7

£5 million – £9.9 million

24.3

23.3

£1 million – £4.9 million

28.3

28.6

£200,000 – £999,000

29.2

31.2

Less than £200,000

27.1

30.9

Range of box office results

Source: Nielsen EDI.
Opening weekends include preview figures. For films with a limited initial opening, the wider release figure is included in the analysis.

From left
The Devil Wears Prada© 2006 Twentieth Century Fox.
All rights reserved.
The Break-Up © Universal Studios.
All rights reserved.
76 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

8.4 Release costs
The opening weekend of a film is recognised as being crucial to the lifetime of a film, both in cinemas and on
subsequent release platforms. Distributors invest heavily in advertising in order to raise a film’s profile across all
media (outdoor posters, print media, TV, radio and increasingly online). From data provided by Nielsen Media
Research (Table 8.5) the estimated total distributor advertising spend in 2006 was £171.3 million, up 3.3% from£165.8 million in 2005.
Table 8.5 Estimated advertising spend, 2006 (£ million)
TV

73.1

Outdoor

60.1

Press

29.0

Radio

8.8

Other

0.3

Total

171.3

Source: Nielsen Media Research.

Where the data are available, we have estimated the total release costs for various release widths. By taking
a typical print cost of £1,000 per print and adding the Nielsen Media Research advertising spend data plus 20%
for other public relations campaigns and publicity and premiere costs, we can calculate an average release costfor each level of theatrical release (see table 8.6).
Table 8.6 Estimated release cost by width of release, 2006
Averagerelease cost(£ million)

Sites at widest point of release

>500

3.72

400–499

2.33

300–399

1.50

200–299

1.10

100–199

0.52

50–99

0.26

10–49

0.08

<10

0.02

Source: Nielsen Media Research, Nielsen EDI, RSU analysis.

See also:
3 For further details about the UK box officein 2006 see chapter 1 (p10)
3 For more information about the top films
at the UK box office in 2006 see chapter 2 (p22)
3 For an overview of employment in film
distribution see chapter 17 (p166)

8: Distribution | 77

9: EXHIBITION
For most film-lovers, the best way to enjoy film is on the
big screen, with a large audience. The fortunes of theexhibition sector are therefore an important indicator of
the vitality of film culture. On this basis, film is thriving,with the number of screens increasing year on year since
2002. Screenings run by providers serving their local
communities, including film societies and mixed-use
venues such as arts centres, are also an important partof the UK’s diverse exhibition landscape.

Northern Ireland
had the highest numberof screens per 100,000
and England had
the lowest

The average
ticket pricewas £4.87

AT
A“
78 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

A
M
E
N
I
C
Only 7%of screens werededicated to‘specialised’
filmsLondonhad the highest
number (15%)
of screens
overallFilm societies
attracted over
225,000 admissions

Rural areas
had 42% of the
UK’s film societies

A
E
N

U
O
Y
R

The UK had
3,440 screens in 697
cinemas, 83 morethan 2005
The five largest
exhibitors operated
75% of screens
9: Exhibition | 79

9.1 UK screens
The number of owned or programmed cinema screens (excluding those operated in venues such as schools andprivate screening rooms) continued to increase in 2006, and at a higher rate than previously, rising 2.5% to 3,440.
This was matched by an increase in the number of sites, from 659 to 697.
Table 9.1 shows that more sites opened than closed in 2006 and the number of traditional screens rose forthe first time in a decade. A total of 31 sites closed in 2006, an increase of 11% on the number of closures in
2005, with a loss of 52 screens. 69 sites opened (including eight multiplexes), adding 135 screens (including
65 multiplex screens).
Table 9.1 Site openings and closures, 2006
Multiplex

Traditional

Sites

Screens

Sites

Screens

Opened

8

65

61

70

Closed

1

6

30

46

+7

+59

+31

+24

Net difference
Source: Dodona Research.

One simple way to gauge the level of cinema provision is to examine ‘screen density’, that is the number ofscreens available per 100,000 people. In 2006, this rose slightly to 5.8 screens per 100,000 people in the UK(5.6 screens in 2005). This level of screen access falls short of the numbers in other major film territories:
USA 13.2, Spain 9.5, Australia 9.5, France 8.9, Italy 6.9 and Germany 5.9 (source: Screen Digest).
Table 9.2 reveals the numbers of admissions per person in major film territories. The UK saw more admissions
per person than both Italy and Germany despite lower screen density.
Table 9.2 Admissions per person, 2003–2006
USA

Australia

France

Spain

UK

Italy

Germany

2003

5.4

4.5

2.9

3.3

2.8

1.5

1.8

2004

5.2

4.5

3.2

3.4

2.9

1.7

1.9

2005

4.7

4.0

2.9

2.9

2.7

1.6

1.5

2006

4.8

4.1

3.1

2.7

2.6

1.6

1.7

Source: Screen Digest.

Right
Watershed Media Centre, Bristol.
80 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

9.2 Screen location
Historically cinemas have been a feature of the urban landscape and 2006 was no different with 96.9% of all
screens in the UK in town or city centres, edge of centre, ‘out of town’ or suburban locations.
Table 9.3 shows suburban and rural cinemas tend to have fewer screens on average than their urban counterparts
although town and city centre sites are also relatively small. The number of rural screens increased in 2006 while
the decline in suburban screens was reversed with two more screens than in 2005.
Table 9.3 Screens by location, 2002–2006
2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

% change
2002–2006

Average no.
of screens

Town/city centre

1,466

1,470

1,502

1,495

1,555

6.1

4

Out of town

1,199

1,234

1,243

1,250

1,262

5.3

10

Edge of centre

456

464

465

479

478

4.8

10

Suburban

34

33

33

38

40

17.6

2

Rural

103

117

99

95

105

1.9

1

Total

3,258

3,318

3,342

3,357

3,440

5.6

–

Location

Source: Dodona Research, RSU analysis.

As in the previous Statistical Yearbook we are able to present screen provision data based on two types ofregional classification. The datasets are not directly comparable because of differences in the way the regions aredefined; they do, however, shed light on different aspects of national and regional variations in screen provision.

Right
BFI Southbank, London.
9: Exhibition | 81

The Cinema Advertising Association produces monthly admissions totals for each of the television advertisingregions used by the Incorporated Society of British Advertisers (ISBA). Screen and admissions data for 2006
using these TV regions are presented in Table 9.4.
Table 9.4 Screens and admissions by ISBA TV region, 2006
Screens

Admissions

Admissions
per screen

London742

39,814,809

53,659Midlands

506

21,861,057

43,204

Lancashire

423

17,418,916

41,179Southern

300

14,090,556

46,969Wales and West292

10,025,205

34,333

Yorkshire275

12,978,182

47,193Central Scotland

233

11,197,632

48,059

East of England206

10,272,548

49,867

Northern Ireland154

4,968,719

32,264

North East

108

5,915,810

54,776South West100

3,291,111

32,911

Northern Scotland

64

3,289,629

51,400Border37

1,436,228

38,817

ISBA TV region

Source: Dodona Research, CAA, RSU analysis.

From left
Red Road, courtesy of Verve Pictures.
Black Book, courtesy of Tartan Video.
82 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 9.5 gives screen information for each of the English Government Office Regions, plus Scotland,
Northern Ireland and Wales, which correspond to the areas covered by the nine English Regional Screen Agencies,
Scottish Screen, the Northern Ireland Film and Television Commission and the Film Agency for Wales.
Table 9.5 Screens and population in the nations and Government Office Regions, 2006
Screens

Population*

Screens
per 100,000

Average no. of
screens per site

London532

7,388,000

7.2

5South East

468

8,080,000

5.8

4North West436

6,805,000

6.4

7West Midlands

309

5,320,000

5.8

6Scotland309

5,057,000

6.1

5South West296

4,999,000

5.9

4Yorkshire238

5,009,000

4.8

6East of England

225

5,463,000

4.1

5

Wales

182

2,938,000

6.2

3

East Midlands

170

4,252,000

4.0

5Northern Ireland154

1,703,000

9.0

7North East

104

2,539,000

4.1

5

Other**

17

N/A

N/A

4

Total

3,440

59,553,000

5.8

5Government office region

Source: Dodona Research, RSU analysis.
*2003 population data.
**Other includes the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man.

The pattern of regional and national variations in screen provision remains unchanged in 2006. It is still the casethat areas of high population in urban areas, such as London, the South East and the North West, had higher
screen numbers. Northern Ireland had the highest number of screens per 100,000 people of the four nations(9) followed by Scotland (6.1), Wales (6.2) and England (5.6). Table 9.5 also reveals that the North West,West Midlands and Northern Ireland had on average six screens per site compared with the national averageof five. The South East, South West and Wales all fell below the average, showing a tendency towards smaller
cinemas and proportionately fewer multiplexes (see Table 9.7 on page 85).

The Road to Guantánamo,
courtesy of Revolution Films.
9: Exhibition | 83

9.3 Multiplexes
The proportion of multiplex screens (defined by Dodona Research as those in purpose-built cinemas with five or
more screens) remained the same as in 2005, as shown in Table 9.6. There has been a rise of 55% in the numberof multiplex screens since 1999 compared with an 18% fall in the number of traditional and mixed-use screens(used for film screenings only part of the time). The UK has gained 888 multiplex screens since 1999 and lost 206
traditional or mixed-use screens. The proportion of multiplex screens has increased from 58.9% in 1999 to 73%
in 2006.
Table 9.6 Cinema screens by type, 1999–2006
Year

Multiplex% multiplex

Traditional andmixed-use

Total

1999

1,624

58.9

1,134

2,758

2000

1,874

63.4

1,080

2,954

2001

2,115

66.8

1,049

3,164

2002

2,299

70.6

959

3,258

2003

2,362

71.2

956

3,318

2004

2,426

72.6

916

3,342

2005

2,453

73.1

904

3,357

2006

2,512

73.0

928

3,440

Source: Dodona Research.

Table 9.7 provides a snapshot of variations in multiplex provision around the UK. The North West had the largest
number of multiplex screens (367), 22 more than London; and the highest proportion of multiplex screens(84.2%). By far the lowest concentration of multiplex screens was found in the South West (57.8%), which had aparticularly high number of traditional and mixed-use screens (the third highest after London and the South East).
Wales (68.1%) and the Channel Islands and Isle of Man (58.8%) also had proportionally fewer multiplex screensthan the national average.

Romanzo Criminale.
84 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 9.7 Cinema screens by type and nation or Government Office Region, 2006
Multiplex% multiplex

Traditional andmixed use

Total screens

North West

367

84.2

69

436

London

345

64.8

187

532

South East

331

70.7

137

468

West Midlands

234

75.7

75

309

Scotland

230

74.4

79

309

Yorkshire

197

82.8

41

238

South West

171

57.8

125

296

East of England

169

75.1

56

225

East Midlands

127

74.7

43

170

Wales

124

68.1

58

182

Northern Ireland

120

77.9

34

154

North East

87

83.7

17

104

Other*

10

58.8

7

17

Total

2,512

73.0

928

3,440

Government office region

Source: Dodona Research, RSU analysis.
*Other includes the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man.

From left
Transamerica, courtesyof Pathé Distribution andBelladonna Productions.
Kidulthood, courtesyof Revolver Entertainment.
9: Exhibition | 85

9.4 Programming
Dodona Research categorises screens according to whether they show mainly mainstream, specialised(that is non-mainstream, including art-house) or South Asian (Bollywood) films.
By far, the majority of screens mainly show mainstream films. In 2006, 535 cinemas with 3,191 screens showed
mainly mainstream films, compared with 157 (231 screens) showing specialised films, and five cinemas(18 screens) dedicated mainly to South Asian films.
Table 9.8 compares figures for 2005 and 2006 and shows that the number of sites and screens showing
mainstream and specialised films increased in 2006 while the number of sites and screens programming
South Asian films remained unchanged.
Table 9.8 Sites and screens by programme, 2005–2006
Sites

Screens

2005

2006

2005

2006

South Asian

5

5

18

18

Specialised

132

157

206

231

Mainstream

522

535

3,133

3,191

Programme

Source: Dodona Research, RSU analysis.

The majority (68%) of specialised screens were found in single, independently-owned cinemas (that is, not partof a chain).
The pattern of programme type by location in 2006 is shown in Table 9.9. Screens showing mainly South Asianfilms were located in town or city centre and suburban areas, while those devoted to specialised film were mainly
found in town or city centres. The overall pattern remained similar to last year except that the rural proportion of
screens showing specialised films had risen sharply from 4.9% in 2005 to 7.4%.
Table 9.9 Proportion of screens by location and programme, 2006
South Asian(%)

Specialised(%)

Mainstream(%)

Town/city centre

44.4

82.7

42.5

Edge of centre

0.0

1.7

14.9

Out of town

0.0

3.5

39.3

Suburban

55.6

4.8

0.6

Rural

0.0

7.4

2.8

Total

100.0

100.0

100.0

Source: Dodona Research, RSU analysis.

This geographical analysis is extended in Tables 9.10 and 9.11, which reveal the distribution of South Asian andspecialised screens around the country.

86 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 9.10 confirms that screens showing mainly South Asian films were found in London and the Midlands,
coinciding with the distribution of South Asian populations. Almost 90% of all South Asian screens were found in
London and the West Midlands, with the remainder in the East Midlands.
Table 9.10 Geographical spread of South Asian screens, 2006
South Asian
screens%

London8

44.4

West Midlands

8

44.4

East Midlands

2

11.1

Other regions*

0

0.0

Total

18

100.0

RegionSource: Dodona Research, RSU analysis.
*Other includes the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man.

Screens showing mainly specialised films were concentrated in London and the South East, which housed 41.6%of them in 2006 (Table 9.11). Scotland had 30 specialised screens and the South West 24, accounting for 13%
and 10.4% of all such screens respectively. Wales (3.5%), the North East (2.2%) and Northern Ireland (0.9%) had
the smallest number of specialised screens.
Table 9.11 Geographical spread of specialised screens, 2006
Specialised
screens%

London65

28.1

South East

31

13.4

Scotland30

13.0South West

24

10.4

West Midlands

16

6.9

East of England

15

6.5

Yorkshire

13

5.6

North West

12

5.2

East Midlands

10

4.3

Wales

8

3.5

North East

5

2.2

Northern Ireland2

0.9

Other*

0

0

Total

231

100

RegionSource: Dodona Research, RSU analysis.
*Other includes the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man.

From left
Cave of the Yellow Dog,
courtesy of Tartan Video.
Dhoom 2, courtesy of Yash Raj Films.
The Little Polar Bear 2(Der Kleine Eisbar 2)© Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.
9: Exhibition | 87

9.5 Exhibitors
The number of exhibitors that owned or programmed 20 or more screens in the UK remained at 13 as in 2005,
as shown in Table 9.12. The five largest exhibitors owned approximately 75% of all UK screens.
Table 9.12 Exhibitors with 20+ screens, 2006
Screens

%

Odeon

840

24.4

Cineworld

739

21.5

Vue

553

16.1

National Amusements

237

6.9

Ward Anderson

198

5.8

Apollo70

2.0City Screen

50

1.5

Movie House Cinemas

39

1.1

Reel Cinemas

33

1.0

AMC

28

0.8

Merlin Cinemas

21

0.6

Hollywood Screen Entertainment

20

0.6

Reeltime

20

0.6

Scott Cinemas

13

0.4

Parkway Entertainment

12

0.3

Storm Cinemas

12

0.3

WTW Cinemas

12

0.3

Bloom

11

0.3

Curzon9

0.3

Northern Morris Associated Cinemas

9

0.3

RJ Towers and Partners

7

0.2

National Amusements / Hoyts

6

0.2

501

14.6

3,440

100.0

OthersGrand total

Source: Dodona Research.
Figures correct as at March 2007.
Odeon is owned by Terra Firma Capital Partners, a European private equity firm with headquarters in London and Frankfurt.
Cineworld comprises the former Cine-UK and UGC chains and is owned by The Blackstone Group, a multi-national private equity company.
Vue, which acquired Warner Village cinemas in 2003, is owned by SBC International Cinemas (headquartered in the UK).
National Amusements is owned by the family of Sumner Redstone, chairman of US media giant Viacom.
Ward Anderson is headquartered in the Republic of Ireland where it operates the Cineplex, IMC and Omniplex chains.

From left
Oklahoma! courtesy ofPark Circus Films.
Crossing the Bridge – the Sound of
Istanbul, courtesy of Soda Pictures.
88 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

9.6 Exhibitor revenues
Dodona Research reports that total exhibitor revenue in 2006 stood at £924 million, a fraction lower than
£929 million (revised figure) in 2005. Net concession revenue stood at £213 million (a rise of 1% on the previousyear), while gross advertising revenue totalled £185 million.
Average ticket prices (calculated by dividing UK box office gross for the year, £762 million, by total UK admissions,156.6 million), rose from £4.67 in 2005 to £4.87 in 2006, an increase of 4%.
9.7 Digital projection
By the end of 2006, 136 of the UK Film Council’s planned 240 state of the art digital cinema screens had
been installed and were fully operational. All of these have played and are playing digital films, with suchreleases as Pan’s Labyrinth, Black Book and Red Road making significant inroads with both critics and audiences.
Final installations will be completed by spring 2007 at which point, the four-year contract with the cinemas forthe delivery of specialised films will commence.
According to Screen Digest at the end of 2006 there were 2,659 DCI-level (Digital Cinema Initiative) digital screensworldwide. Table 9.13 shows the number of high-end digital (often referred to as ‘D-Cinema’ in the industry)
screens in the world in 2005 and 2006. The total number of digital screens worldwide had more than tripled in2006 from last year.
Table 9.13 Number of high-end digital screens in the world, 2005-2006
2005

2006

RegionScreens% of total

Screens% of total

Europe

229

27.0

532

17.8

America

345

40.7

2,030

67.8

2

0.2

4

0.1

Asia-Pacific

272

32.1

430

14.4

Total

848

100

2,996

100

Africa and Middle East

Source: Screen Digest.
The table includes a small number of digital screens using the earlier 1.3K DLP Cinema projectors. The minimum projector resolution for DCI is 2K.

9: Exhibition | 89

The sharp rise in 2006 was mainly a result of a six-fold increase in digital screens in the USA to 2,003 screens(324 in 2005). In Europe, the UK had the highest number of high-end digital screens, as shown in Table 9.14.
Table 9.14 Top five European countries with high-end digital screens, ranked by number of screens, 2006
Digital Screens% ofEuropean total% changefrom 2005

UK

148

27.8

+289

Germany

105

19.7

+218

Italy

41

7.7

+58

Belgium

34

6.4

+62

France

32

6.0

+78

Country

Source: Screen Digest.
The table includes a small number of digital screens using the earlier 1.3K DLP Cinema projectors. The minimum projector resolution for DCI is 2K.

In Europe, only the UK and Germany had more than 100 high-end digital screens. The top five countries owned
68% of all of the high-end digital screens in Europe. China and South Korea had the highest numbers of digital
screens in the Asia-Pacific region at 156 and 130 screens respectively.
9.8 Community cinema provision in the UK, 2006
The exhibition of films in the UK is not exclusive to cinemas belonging to national chains. There is a thriving sector
that provides cinema access to local communities. Historically, this sector has been termed non-theatrical, withsuch screenings taking place in venues as diverse as village halls, mixed-arts venues and independent cinemas.
While they can be run on the same commercial terms as regular cinemas, community cinemas often operate
on a non-commercial basis. They provide access to films, often specialised in nature, which would otherwise
be unavailable.
This type of provision serves communities in ways that go beyond simply meeting consumer demand, by involving
them in programming and allowing them to shape the way they engage with film culture. Community cinema
providers also host education and social events, discussion groups and talks, often with links to local culturalactivities like arts festivals, alongside their regular programming. In this way they make an active contribution to
the cultural vitality of their communities.
The contribution of the community cinema movement has often gone unnoticed at the national level because
there has been very little information about the size, composition and geographical distribution of the sector.
This lack of knowledge of the sector has prompted a 2006 survey, Cinema For All, of the membership of the
British Federation of Film Societies (BFFS). The BFFS has also compiled a database of community cinema
providers in the UK, which includes its members but is not restricted to them, and this section presents datafrom both sources.

90 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

9.8.1 BFFS membership survey
The BFFS is the national support and development agency for the film society and community cinema sector.
It receives funding from the UK Film Council to undertake activities consistent with the Council’s objective for
ensuring audiences throughout the UK have access to the full range of British and international cinema.
The BFFS membership survey was sent out to all members in June 2006 (240 in total), and 125 responded tothe survey, a response rate of 52%.
Over two-fifths of the responding societies were established in 2000 or later, while a significant proportion(23.3%) were established in the 1960s or earlier. Nearly all of the societies that responded (89.7%) operated amembership system in 2005/06 and the average membership size was 141. The membership of responding
societies stood at 14,285. If extrapolated to all BFFS members this would suggest a sum total membership ofmore than 27,000 people.
The average full annual membership fee was £24. Less than one-third of societies that operated a membershipsystem charged an additional admission fee (27.6%), which averaged £2.87 in 2005/06. A minority of responding
societies offered season tickets (22.6%). Season ticket charges ranged from £10 (giving entry to 16 films) to£104 for a year, and the average number of season ticket holders stood at 84 in 2005/06.
On average, just under half of members were aged over 55 (46.8%) and a further 24.4% were aged 46 to
55 years (Table 9.15). Just over two-thirds (67%) of societies had no members under 19 years of age in 2005/06.
Film societies had more female members than males (56.8% female members and 43.2% males), while 2.4%
of film society membership was estimated to be from a minority ethnic background. Less than 1% (0.7%) ofmembers were wheelchair users, and 4.2% of members had other disabilities.
Table 9.15 Age distribution of members of UK film societies, 2006
Age%

Less than 46

28.8

46 to 55

24.4

Greater than 55

46.8

Total

100.0

Emphasising the social and educative role of film societies, just under half of all responding societies held special
events in addition to screenings in 2005/06, while the majority of film societies (71.7%) provided programmingnotes to accompany screenings.
The responding societies programmed a total of 526 different titles across 1,962 screenings during the 2005/06
season (compared with 505 films released theatrically in the UK during 2006). One in five films screened by film
societies were British in 2005/06, while over two-fifths (41.6%) were films in a foreign language. The three mostprogrammed films were The Motorcycle Diaries, Sideways and Vera Drake.
Exactly half of the responding societies had an average of 60 or fewer audience members per screening. While asmall proportion (14.2%) had 30 or fewer admissions on average, an almost similar proportion (12.3%) had morethan 151 audience members.
Under half (45.5%) of societies had 750 or fewer admissions in 2005/06, while nearly one in five (19.3%) had
more than 2,001 annual admissions. The smallest recorded annual admissions stood at 120, while the largest
figure was 14,000.

From left
Hidden (Caché) by kind permissionof Artificial Eye Films.
Sideways © 2004 Twentieth Century
Fox. All rights reserved.
Pan’s Labyrinth, courtesy of Optimum
Home Entertainment 2007.
The Motorcycle Diaries,
courtesy of Film4.
9: Exhibition | 91

The sum total of all admissions from responding societies was 116,040 for 2005/06. If this were extrapolated
to all BFFS members, the total number of admissions would have been around 225,000. Putting this inperspective, theatrical ticket sales on this scale would have generated gross box office receipts of over £1 million(225,000 multiplied by £4.87 [the average ticket price in 2006] = £1,095,750).
Just under half of societies (47.8%) used more than one format to screen films. The most commonly used format
was DVD (used by 85.5% of responding societies). But despite the dominance of digital technology, just over
one-third of societies still use VHS. A slightly smaller proportion (31.6%) used 35mm, with 13.7% using 16mm.
On average, film societies were located 9.43 miles from their nearest commercial cinema, ranging from less thana mile to 80 miles. Just under half of societies (47.5%) operated in town locations with 42.4% in rural areas(14.4% in remote rural locations more than 10 miles from a large settlement).
9.8.2 Community cinema provision
As of October 2006, there were 746 community cinema providers operating in the UK (see 9.8 for the source of
this data). Community cinema providers include film societies, independent cinemas, mixed-use venues thatscreen films, and mobile and touring screen networks. Some of the independently owned and run cinemas
included in the community cinema database also appear in the exhibition analysis presented in previous chapters.
Readers should not assume that the 746 community cinema providers are in addition to the 697 cinemas
described in section 9.1 as there is some overlap in the two datasets.
Table 9.16 shows the number of community cinema providers by type. The majority were general film societies(32%) followed by independent cinema (29%). It also reveals that there were nearly as many mixed-use venues(eg local authority-run community arts venues) screening films as independent cinemas in 2006.
Table 9.16: Number of community cinema providers by type
Type

Number%

General film society*

242

32.2

Independent cinema

214

28.7

Mixed-use venue

203

27.2

Higher education film society

82

11.0

Miscellaneous

5

0.7

Festival

2

0.3

Total

746

100.0

*General film society includes two film festivals that are members of the BFFS.
Source: BFFS.

Left
The Proposition,
courtesy of Tartan Video.
92 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 9.17 looks at the spread of the community cinema providers across the nations and regions. The majority(80%) of the community cinemas in the UK were in England, followed by Wales and Scotland both at around 9%.
The South West had the largest number of community cinemas (135) while over half of the community cinemas
were located in the South West, South East, London and Wales.
Table 9.17: Number of community cinemas across UK nations and regions
Nation/region

Number%South West

135

18.1

South East

123

16.5

London

78

10.5

Wales

69

9.2

Scotland68

9.1

North West

60

8.0

East of England

58

7.8

Yorkshire54

7.2

East Midlands

38

5.1

West Midlands

30

4.0

North East

17

2.3

Northern Ireland

10

1.3

Other*

6

0.8

Total

746

100.0

Source: BBFS.

From left
Cockles & Muscles, courtesyof Peccadillo Pictures.
Vera Drake, courtesyof Momentum Pictures.
9: Exhibition | 93

Just under one-third of all community cinema providers in England were general film societies as Table 9.18
reveals. Scotland had the highest number of general film societies as a proportion of all community cinema
providers (39.7%). Over half of all providers in Wales were mixed-use venues (52.2%). Independent cinemas
dominated Northern Ireland’s community cinema provision (70% of the total).
Table 9.18: Proportion of community cinema providers by type across nations and regions
England
(%)

Wales
(%)

Scotland(%)

Northern
Ireland(%)

Festival

0.3

0.0

0.0

0.0

General film society

32.9

21.7

39.7

0.0

Higher education film society

11.8

7.2

10.3

0.0

Independent cinema

28.7

18.8

30.9

70.0

Miscellaneous

0.8

0.0

0.0

0.0

Mixed-use venue

25.5

52.2

19.1

30.0

Total

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

Type

Source: BFFS.

The majority (80% as shown in Table 9.17) of community cinema providers could be found in the English regions.
Table 9.19 shows the spread of different types of community cinema provision across the English regions.
The South West (which had the highest number of community cinema providers in England) had the highest
proportion of general film societies (47.8%). The lowest was in the North East (11.8%). London had the highest
proportion of independent cinemas (36.8%), which made up the largest section of community cinema providers in
the capital. The North East had the lowest proportion of independent cinemas (17.6%), but the highest proportionof mixed-use venues (47.1%). The lowest proportion of mixed-use venues was found in Yorkshire (14.8%).
Table 9.19: Proportion of community cinemas by type across English regions
RegionGeneral Higher education
film society
film society

Independent
cinemaMixed-use
venue

East Midlands

26.3

15.8

26.3

31.6

East of England

28.6

19.6

16.1

35.7

London

22.4

22.4

36.8

18.4

North East

11.8

23.5

17.6

47.1

North West

39.7

8.6

29.3

22.4

South East

28.5

8.9

32.5

30.1

South West

47.8

5.2

26.1

20.9

West Midlands

30.0

6.7

26.7

36.7

Yorkshire

35.2

13.0

37.0

14.8

Source: BFFS.
For ease of reporting, film festivals and miscellaneous categories have been omitted.

94 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

See also:
3 For cinema admissions and box office in 2006
see chapter 1 (p10)
3 For a look at cinema audiences
see chapter 10 (p96)
3 For employment in the exhibition sector
see chapter 17 (p166)
Above
Casablanca, courtesyof Park Circus Films.

3 For more about the UK Film Council’s
Digital Screen Network see
www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk

9: Exhibition | 95

There was aneven split between
men and women in thecinema audience forthe top 20 films

“TH
INK
ACT
ION
ME
ETS

In 2006, 60% of
the UK population
said they went tothe cinema at least
once a year

18% went
once a monthor more10: AUDIENCES
Despite the ready availability of home-based
entertainment, going to the cinema is still a highly
popular activity, particularly for younger age groups.
This chapter takes a detailed look at cinema audiencesby age, gender and film preferences. It also summarisesa recent study showing who downloads film free fromthe Internet.
96 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Dramas andcomedies with womenin leading roles plus
family films appealed
most to the female
audience
12% of the cinemagoing population
reported thatthey had downloaded
a film for free off
the Internet

CHI
CKFLICK
The cinema audience
for the top 20 films in2006 was predominantly
young, with the 7-34 age
group (40% of the
population) making up
64% of the audience

10: Audiences | 97

10.1 Cinema audience by genderSix out of ten people went to the cinema at least once in 2006. This figure appears to be lower than that ofprevious years but, due to a change in survey method, this proportion is not directly comparable with figures
published in previous Yearbooks. Almost one person in five, 18%, went to the cinema once a month or more.
The overall UK cinema audience in 2006 had a slight male bias, as Table 10.1 shows.
Table 10.1 Cinema audience by gender, 2006
Male %

Female %See at least one film per year (proportion of population)*60

60

Go to the cinema at least once a month (proportion of population)

20

16

Top 20 films (proportion of audience)

50

50

Top UK films (proportion of audience)55

45

Total survey population 7+

49

51

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.
Audience data were only available for 16 of the top 20 UK films in 2006.
*Due to a change in survey method this proportion is not directly comparable with the figures published in 2005/06 and previously.

10.2 Film preferences by gender
Although the overall cinema audience in 2006 was split almost evenly between men and women, some films
attracted substantially more of one gender than the other as Table 10.2 shows. Men preferred action-led films,
including dramas (United 93, Match Point), action (V for Vendetta, X-Men 3, Superman Returns, Stormbreaker,
Mission: Impossible III, Casino Royale) and comedy (Borat: Cultural Learnings…) films. Comedy (The Holiday) anddrama films with women in the leading roles figured highly in the list of films with large female audience shares(The Devil Wears Prada, The Queen, The Break Up) along with romantic drama (Brokeback Mountain) andanimation (Happy Feet and Chicken Little).
Given the success of action-led films in 2006 (see Table 7.7 in Chapter 7), it is not surprising to see that, unlike in2005, top UK films had a male audience skew. It is notable that five of the films with the highest male audienceshares were British (Table 10.2).
Table 10.2 Top films by audience gender split, UK box office, 2006
Top 20 films and top UK films
Greater female audience share
Title

Male %

Female %The Devil Wears Prada

22

78

The Queen (UK)23

77

The Holiday

31

69

Brokeback Mountain

34

66

The Break Up

38

62

Happy Feet

38

62

Chicken Little

42

58

98 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Greater male audience share
Title

Male %

Female %United 93 (UK)89

11

V for Vendetta (UK)82

18

Match Point (UK)71

29

Borat: Cultural Learnings…

69

31

X-Men 365

35

Superman Returns

65

35

Stormbreaker (UK)64

36

Mission: Impossible III

62

38

Casino Royale (UK)58

42

Male %

Female %Confetti (UK)4060Over the Hedge

46

54

Cars

47

53

Flushed Away (UK)48

52

Ice Age 2

48

52

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest

49

51

Walk the Line50

50

The Da Vinci Code (UK)51

49

Night at the Museum

51

49

Alien Autopsy (UK)53

47

Breaking and Entering (UK)55

45

The History Boys (UK)57

43

The Departed

62

38

The Wind that Shakes the Barley (UK)63

37

Basic Instinct 2: Risk Addiction (UK)64

36Children of Men (UK)66

34

Severance (UK)74

26

Gender difference not statistically significant
Title

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.
Because the CAVIAR Film Monitor uses a sample survey to represent the UK population, a test for statistical significance has been applied to determine which titles
can be described as having a greater male or female audience share. The smaller the audience for a particular film, the larger the male/female difference needed to
be statistically significant. This is why some films with an apparently large male majority audience are listed under ‘gender difference not statistically significant’.
Audience demographic data were only available for 16 of the top 20 UK films in 2006.

10: Audiences | 99

10.3 Cinema audience by age
Teenagers and young adults were the most frequent cinema-goers in 2006 as Table 10.3 shows, a patterncommon to previous years. In 2006, the 40% of the population in the 7–34 age group provided 64% of the top
20 film audience and 58% of the top UK film audience.
Table 10.3 Cinema audience by age group, 2006
Age 7–14%

Age 15–24%

Age 25–34%

Age 35–44%

Age 45–54%

Age 55+%

See at least one film per year
(proportion of population)

87

82

71

68

59

32

Go to the cinema at least once a month(proportion of population)

28

42

24

15

11

5

Top 20 films (proportion of audience)

19

26

19

18

10

8

Top UK films (proportion of audience)

14

25

19

16

11

15

Total survey population aged 7+

11

14

15

17

13

31

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.

Table 10.4 shows the breakdown of the cinema audience by age and gender. The younger (aged under 35)
audience had a male skew whereas the older audience had a female skew.
Table 10.4 Cinema audience by gender and age group, 2006
Age 7–14%

Age 15–24%

Age 25–34%

Age 35–44%

Age 45–54%

Age 55+%All ages
%

Male

9

18

10

7

4

5

53

Female

7

13

8

7

5

7

47

Total

16

31

18

14

9

12

100

Source: CAA.

10.4 Film preferences by age
It was a good year for comedy and action-led films. These two genres together captured 46% of the total grossbox office of the year (see Table 7.7). Action-led films, animated features and comedy films appealed to the 7–14
audience (Table 10.5). Comedy and action-led films appealed to the 15–24 age group (Table 10.6). Drama, crimeand action-led films appealed to the 25–34 audience (Table 10.7). Animated features appealed to the 35–44
audience (Table 10.8), many of whom would be parents taking their children to see them. Drama appealed to the
45–54 and over–55 age groups (Tables 10.9 and 10.10); in particular, UK drama films had the strongest appeal tothe over-55 audience in 2006.

Severance © UK Film Council/ N1
European Film Produktions GmbH& Co. KG 2006. Photo: Nick Wall.
100 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 10.5 Films with an above-average audience in 7–14 age group, 2006
Top 20 films and top UK films
Title

Age group %of the film’s total audience

Stormbreaker (UK)

41.9

Flushed Away (UK)40.7Night at the Museum

33.7

Ice Age 2

31.0

Over the Hedge

29.9

Happy Feet

29.6

Cars

28.8

Chicken Little

27.6

7–14 age group in top 20 audience (%)

19.3

7–14 age group in top UK audience (%)

13.6

7–14 age group in total survey population (%)

11.1

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.
Only those films that had a statistically significantly higher than average audience in the above age group are reported in this table.

Table 10.6 Films with an above-average audience in 15–24 age group, 2006
Top 20 films and top UK films
Title

Age group %of the film’s total audience

Severance (UK)

63.2

Borat: Cultural Learnings...

62.4

V for Vendetta (UK)50.6

The Break Up

49.7

Confetti (UK)45.7

Children of Men (UK)45.2

Alien Autopsy (UK)40.3

X-Men 3

36.4

The Devil Wears Prada

36.0

Superman Returns

35.5

15–24 age group in top 20 audience (%)

26.1

15–24 age group in top UK audience (%)

24.7

15–24 age group in total survey population (%)

13.8

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.
Only those films that had a statistically significantly higher than average audience in the above age group are reported in this table.

10: Audiences | 101

Table 10.7 Films with an above-average audience in 25–34 age group, 2006
Top 20 films and top UK films
Age group %of the film’s total audience

Title

Breaking and Entering (UK)47.8

United 93 (UK)39.8

The Departed

31.4

Mission: Impossible III

27.3

Superman Returns

25.6

X-Men 3

23.4

The Da Vinci Code

23.0

25–34 age group in top 20 audience (%)

18.7

25–34 age group in top UK audience (%)

19.1

25–34 age group in total survey population (%)

14.7

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.
Only those films that had a statistically significantly higher than average audience in the above age group are reported in this table.

Table 10.8 Films with an above-average audience in 35–44 age group, 2006
Top 20 films and top UK films
Age group %of the film’s total audience

Title

Flushed Away (UK)26.7

Over the Hedge

23.7

Happy Feet

23.2

Cars

22.1

35–44 age group in top 20 audience (%)

17.7

35–44 age group in top UK audience (%)

16.4

35–44 age group in total survey population (%)

16.7

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.
Only those films that had a statistically significantly higher than average audience in the above age group are reported in this table.

Breaking and Entering, courtesyof Buena Vista Home Entertainment.
102 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 10.9 Films with an above-average audience in 45–54 age group, 2006
Top 20 films and top UK films
Age group %of the film’s total audience

Title

The Wind that Shakes the Barley (UK)23.9

Brokeback Mountain

20.5

The Queen (UK)17.6

The Da Vinci Code (UK)

14.5

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest

12.4

45–54 age group in top 20 audience (%)

9.8

45–54 age group in top UK audience (%)

10.9

45–54 age group in total survey population (%)

13.2

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.
Only those films that had a statistically significantly higher than average audience in the above age group are reported in this table.

Table 10.10 Films with an above-average audience in 55+ age group, 2006
Top 20 films and top UK films
Age group %of the film’s total audience

Title

The Queen (UK)58.8

The History Boys (UK)40.4

The Wind that Shakes the Barley (UK)33.9

Walk the Line

31.7

Brokeback Mountain

20.5

The Da Vinci Code (UK)

17.2

Casino Royale (UK)

13.5

55+ age group in top 20 audience (%)

8.4

55+ age group in top UK audience (%)

15.3

55+ age group in total survey population (%)

30.6

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.
Only those films that had a statistically significantly higher than average audience in the above age group are reported in this table.

Casino Royale © 2006 Danjaq,
LLC and United Artists Corporation
and Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc.
10: Audiences | 103

10.5 Cinema audience by social group
The cinema audience for both the top 20 films and top UK films had a higher incidence of people in professionaland higher-skilled manual occupations than in the population as a whole (Table 10.11).
Table 10.11 Cinema audience by social group, 2006
AB

C1

C2

DE

73

65

59

44

Go to the cinema at least once a month (% proportion of population) 22

21

16

12

Top 20 films (% proportion of audience)

30

34

20

16

Top UK films (% proportion of audience)

35

33

17

15

Total survey population 7+

25

29

21

25

See at least one film per year (% proportion of population)

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.
AB: Professional, business and white collar, C1: Higher-skilled manual, C2: Lower-skilled manual, DE: ‘Semi-’ and ‘Un-skilled’ manual.

10.6 Film preferences by social groupSix films had a particularly high appeal to the AB audience (compared with three last year): The Queen,
Stormbreaker, Brokeback Mountain, The Devil Wears Prada, Casino Royale and The Da Vinci Code, four of themcertified as UK films (Table 10.12). The Departed and Mission: Impossible III had a particularly high appeal to theC1 audience (Table 10.13). Basic Instinct 2: Risk Addiction and Cars appealed to the DE audience (Table 10.14).
No titles stood out for the C2 group.
Table 10.12 Films with above-average AB audience share, 2006
Top 20 films and top UK films
Title

AB group %of film’s total audience

The Queen (UK)42.0

Stormbreaker (UK)40.1

Brokeback Mountain

39.9

The Devil Wears Prada

38.7

Casino Royale (UK)37.6

The Da Vinci Code (UK)37.1

AB share of top 20 audience

29.9

AB share of top UK audience

34.7

AB in total survey population (%)

24.7

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.
Only those films that had a statistically significantly higher than average audience in the above age group are reported in this table.

V for Vendetta © Warner Bros.
Entertainment Inc.
104 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 10.13 Films with above-average C1 audience share, 2006
Top 20 films and top UK films
C1 group %of film’s total audience

Title

The Departed

46.3

Mission: Impossible III

40.6

C1 share of top 20 audience

33.8

C1 share of top UK audience

32.5

C1 in total survey population (%)

29.1

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.
Only those films that had a statistically significantly higher than average audience in the above age group are reported in this table.

Table 10.14 Films with above-average DE audience share, 2006
Top 20 films and top UK films
DE group %of film’s total audience

Title

Basic Instinct 2: Risk Addiction (UK)

28.7

Cars

21.1

DE share of top 20 audience

16.5

DE share of top UK audience

15.4

DE in total survey population (%)

25.3

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.
Only those films that had a statistically significantly higher than average audience in the above age group are reported in this table.

10.7 Film audiences by ethnicity
Once again, minority ethnic groups were over-represented among buyers of cinema tickets, rental films andpay-per-view (PPV) and under-represented among buyers of DVDs/videos (Table 10.15). The picture was broadly
similar to that of the previous three years except for buyers of pay-per-view which nearly doubled from last year.
Table 10.15 Ethnicity of audiences aged 12–74 for cinema, rental and retail DVD/video, PPV, 2006
Black, Asian, Chinese,
mixed and other %White %

Population aged 12–74

8.7

91.3

Buyers of cinema, rental, retail and PPV film

8.4

91.6

DVD/video renters

11.2

88.8

DVD/video buyers

7.6

92.3

Cinema-goers

13.1

86.9

PPV buyers

15.8

84.2

Source: TNS.

For reference, the size of each of these markets as measured in the TNS survey is shown in Table 10.16.

10: Audiences | 105

Table 10.16 Size of cinema, rental, retail and PPV markets for 12–74 age groups, 2006
Number of
persons/buyers(millions)Market volume(millionsof purchases)

Population aged 12–74

48.2

n/a

Total buyers: cinema, rental, retail and PPV film

37.8

519.4

DVD/video renters

12.7

125.7

Cinema-goers

20.9

146.3

PPV

4.1

8.2

DVD/video buyers

24.6

238.9

Source: TNS.

As in 2005 there was a common core of films that were popular across the main ethnic groups, but certain titles
had stronger appeal to particular groups, as illustrated in Table 10.17, which shows the top ten films for the black,white and Indian and Pakistani ethnic groups. The popular adventure film, Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s
Chest, was the favourite film for all three ethnic groups.
Cars, Click, The Devil Wears Prada and The Departed appear in the white population’s top ten but in neither ofthe other top tens. Saw 3, Little Man and You, Me and Dupree appear in black people’s top 10 but did not get
into the top 10 lists of the other groups. Miami Vice and Mission: Impossible III appear in the Indian and Pakistanigroup but did not make it into the top 10 lists in the other groups.
Table 10.17 Top films by ethnicity of audience, 2006
Rank

White

Black

Indian and Pakistani

1

Pirates of the Caribbean:
Dead Man’s Chest

Pirates of the Caribbean:
Dead Man’s Chest

Pirates of the Caribbean:
Dead Man’s Chest

2

The Da Vinci Code

Borat: Cultural Learnings…

Superman Returns

3

X-Men 3

Superman Returns

The Break Up

4

Cars

Saw 3

The Da Vinci Code5

Borat: Cultural Learnings…

X-Men 3

Casino Royale

6

Over the Hedge

Little Man

Borat: Cultural Learnings…

7

Click

The Break Up

X-Men 3

8

The Devil Wears Prada

Casino Royale

Miami Vice

9

The Departed

The Da Vinci CodeOver the Hedge

10

Superman Returns

You, Me and Dupree

Mission: Impossible III

Source: FAME.
Black means the sum of black Caribbean, black African and ‘black other’ groups. ‘Indian and Pakistani’ is the sum of Indian and Pakistani. Other ethnic groups havenot been shown separately due to small sample sizes.

106 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

10.8 Film audiences by disability
As in the previous three years, disabled people were significantly under-represented overall among those who
paid to watch films. Retail DVD/video was the only market segment in which disabled purchasers matched theiroverall population percentage.
Table 10.18 Disabled audiences aged 12–74 for cinema, rental and retail DVD/video, PPV, 2006
Disabled %Not disabled %Population aged 12–74

14.9

85.0

Buyers of cinema, rental, retail and PPV film

12.0

88.0

DVD/video renters

6.0

94.1

Cinema-goers

6.0

93.9

PPV buyers

2.5

97.5

DVD/video buyers

15.3

84.6

Source: TNS.

10.9 Film preferences by region
The regional distribution of the audiences for most top 20 and top UK films was close to that of the top 20
audience as a whole. Eight titles had unusually high audience shares in particular regions: The History Boys,
Mission: Impossible III and X-Men 3 in London (Table 10.19), Alien Autopsy and V for Vendetta in the South/South
East (Table 10.20), Happy Feet in South West/Wales (Table 10.21), Night at the Museum in Tyne Tees/Yorkshire(Table 10.22) and The Break Up and Happy Feet in Scotland (Table 10.23).
Table 10.19 Films with above-average London audience share, 2006
Top 20 films and top UK films
Title

London %of film’s total audience

The History Boys (UK)37.1

Mission: Impossible III

30.5

X-Men 3

30.1

London share of top 20 audience

22.8

London share of top UK audience

25.7

London total survey population (%)

19.8

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.
Only those films that had a statistically significantly higher than average audience in the above age group are reported in this table.

From left
Over the Hedge, courtesy of
Paramount Pictures.
Brokeback Mountain, courtesy ofEntertainment Film Distributors.
10: Audiences | 107

Table 10.20 Films with above-average South/South East audience share, 2006
Top 20 films and top UK films
South/South East %of film’s total audience

Title

Alien Autopsy (UK)33.2

V for Vendetta (UK)28.5

South/South East share of top 20 audience

17.4

South/South East share of top UK audience

18.7

South/South East total survey population (%)

17.4

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.
Only those films that had a statistically significantly higher than average audience in the above age group are reported in this table.

Table 10.21 Films with above-average South West/Wales audience share, 2006
Top 20 films and top UK films
South West/Wales %of film’s total audience

Title

Happy Feet

13.0

South West/Wales share of top 20 audience

8.3

South West/Wales share of top UK audience

7.4

South West/Wales total survey population (%)

9.0

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.
Only those films that had a statistically significantly higher than average audience in the above age group are reported in this table.

Table 10.22 Films with above-average Tyne Tees/Yorkshire audience share, 2006
Top 20 films and top UK films
Tyne Tees/Yorkshire %of film’s total audience

Title

Night at the Museum

17.8

Tyne Tees/Yorkshire share of top 20 audience

13.8

Tyne Tees/Yorkshire share of top UK audience

12.0

Tyne Tees/Yorkshire total survey population (%)

14.5

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.
Only those films that had a statistically significantly higher than average audience in the above age group are reported in this table.

The Departed, courtesy of Entertainment
Film Distributors.
108 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 10.23 Films with above-average Scotland audience share, 2006
Top 16 films and top UK films
Scotland %of film’s total audience

Title

The Break Up

17.0

Happy Feet

13.5

Scotland share of top 20 audience

9.0

Scotland share of top UK audience

8.1

Scotland total survey population (%)

8.8

Source: CAVIAR Film Monitor quarterly reports.
Only those films that had a statistically significantly higher than average audience in the above age group are reported in this table.

10.10 Film download and digital film piracy by age
In 2006, the CAA commissioned an annual online survey of people who had been to the cinema in the six months
prior to the survey. Known as FAME (Film Audience Measurement and Evaluation), the 2006 survey included
questions about film downloads from the Internet and film piracy. Table 10.24 shows that overall 12% of the
respondents reported downloading at least one film for free off the Internet in 2006. This is higher than the 5%
rate reported in the IPSOS survey in chapter 13. The explanation for the difference is likely to be that the FAME
survey was confined to recent cinema-goers with Internet access (on average a youthful cohort interested in film),
while the IPSOS survey was of the whole population.
In the FAME survey, the 15–24 age group was the most active in film downloading (Table 10.24). Those whoreported downloading films from the internet were asked a follow-up question on whether they had seen any
newly-released film outside the cinema; 51% reported that they had done so and 5% declined to answer thisquestion. Again, the 15–24 age group reported the highest rate of having watched a newly-released film outside
the cinema. At the time of the survey (December 2006) there were very few websites available for legal film
downloads so it is likely that most of these reported film downloads were illicit.
Table 10.24 Film downloads and film piracy by age group of cinema-going population, 2006
Age
7–14
%

Age
15–24
%

Age
25–34
%

Age
35–44
%

Age
45–54
%

Age
55+
%

All ages%Ever downloaded a film
for free off the Internet

11

22

14

10

6

6

12

Ever watched a newlyreleased film anywhere
but the cinema (of those
who had downloaded
film free off the Internet)

34

65

53

49

37

36

51

Source: FAME (CAA).

10: Audiences | 109

10.11 Comparative profiles of cinema audiences and audiences for film on television
Table 10.25 compares the audience profiles for film at the cinema and film on television. Although the gender
split is roughly equal in each case, there is a dramatic difference in the age and social group profiles of the two
audiences. The film on television audience is much older (39% over the age of 55) and skewed towards the DE
social group and away from the AB group. The cinema audience is relatively youthful (65% under the age of 35)
and skewed towards the AB and C1 social groups.
Table 10.25 Demographic shares of cinema audience and audience for film on television, 2006
Share ofCinema audience for film
audience shareon television
%
%

Male

53

49

Female47

51

Age 7–14 (cinema) and 4–15 (TV)16715–24 (cinema) and 16–24 (TV)

31

8

25–34

18

12

35–44

14

16

45–54

9

17

55+

12

39

AB

30*

15

C1

34*

24

C2

20*

20

DE

16*

41

Source: DGA Metrics, CAA, RSU analysis.
* Denotes split for top 20 titles only.

Given the 3.3 billion size of the audience for film on television (chapter 12) Table 10.25 demonstrates how film
reaches all ages and social groups through its successive release windows.
10.12 Frequency by age of cinema-goers watching and buying DVDs,
going to the cinema and watching television
Table 10.26 shows the frequency with which cinema-goers visited the cinema as compared with watching
television, watching DVDs and buying DVDs. The results shown here are based on the FAME (Film Audience
Measurement and Evaluation) 2006 online survey whose respondents had all been to the cinema in the six
months prior to the survey. Watching television was the most prevalent activity across the whole age range,
with the most frequent viewers skewed towards the 35+ group. The frequency of DVD watching overall was
substantially higher than cinema visiting, but with a similarly youthful age skew. Frequent DVD watching wasparticularly common in the 7–14 and 15–24 age groups whereas frequent DVD buying was also common in thelatter age group.

From left
The Break-Up, courtesy of
Universal Pictures.
Happy Feet © WV Films III LLC.
110 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 10.26 Frequency by age of cinema-goers watching and buying DVDs,
going to the cinema and watching television, 2006
Age
7–14
%

Age
15–24
%

Age
25–34
%

Age
35–44
%

Age
45–54
%

Age
55+
%

Watch DVD once a month or more

98

93

94

93

88

77

Watch DVD once a week or more

74

63

59

57

50

35

Bought DVD once a month or more

na

62

53

57

45

34

Bought DVD once a week or more

na

5

5

4

4

3

Go to cinema once a month or more

53

71

54

49

40

44

Go to cinema once a week or more

4

8

5

4

2

3

Watch TV 2 hours
or more on a weekday

80

80

89

90

89

89

Watch TV 5 hours
or more on a weekday

8

18

14

18

18

19

Watch TV 2 hours
or more at the weekend

96

89

94

97

96

94

Watch TV 5 hours
or more at the weekend

40

37

44

52

45

43

Source: FAME (CAA).
na = not asked.

See also
3 For more information about top films at the box
office in 2006 see chapter 2 (p22)
3 For further details about films on DVD
see chapter 11 (p112)
3 For further information about film on televisionsee chapter 12 (p118)
3 For more information about film exhibition
regionally see chapter 9 (p78)
3 For the impact of film piracy on the UK film
industry see chapter 13 (p130)
10: Audiences | 111

11: FILM ON DVD
Films reach a wide audience through their releaseon video, though home viewers do not always choose
the box office favourites. Home viewing is now almost
entirely in DVD format, with even newer digitaltechnologies edging their way into the market.

Film accounts
for 99% of the
DVD rental market
and 72% of
DVD sales

116 million
DVDs were rented
and 227 million
DVDs were sold

Y
E
N
O
M
S
’
E
R
E
H
“T

E
H
T
N
I

The market was worth£2.5 billion, 7% down
on 2005, but DVD sales
increased by 7%

112 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Flightplan was the top
rental title and Pirates of
the Caribbean: Dead
Man’s Chest was thehighest DVD seller

Online DVD
rental accounted
for 24% of rental
transactions

N
E
E
R
C
S
L
L
A
M
S
80% ofhouseholds
now own a
DVD player

British films accounted
for 17% of all
DVD rental transactions
and 19% of sales
11: Film on DVD | 113

11.1 Film in the video rental market
116 million DVDs were rented in 2006 (including over-the-counter and online rentals) with an average value of£2.94. Film represented 99% of all rental transactions and UK films accounted for 17% of all transactions on DVD(down from 22% in 2005). Renting DVDs online (for postal delivery) is a major growth area and accounted for
24% of rental transactions in 2006. VHS accounted for only 0.3% of the total rental market, both in volume andvalue terms – compared with 5% in 2005.
Figure 11.1 shows that the number of transactions fell by 21 million from 2005, to its lowest level over the last
20 years. The value of the rental market fell to £340 million from a peak of £476 million in 2002.
Figure 11.1 Rental video market, 1997–2006
million
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Transactions(millions)

161

186

174

186

186

176

156

153

137

116

Value
(£ million)

369

437

408

444

465

476

450

461

399

340

Source: BVA.
Revised data for 2005.

The ten most rented over-the-counter DVD titles of 2006 are shown in Table 11.1 dominated by thrillers andaction/adventure films. As the table makes clear it is not always the biggest box office successes that go on
to perform well in the rental charts. Films that may have performed quite modestly on theatrical release(for example, Flightplan, Inside Man and Lucky Number Slevin) can perform much better in the rental charts.
Table 11.1 Top 10 over-the-counter rental DVD titles, 2006
Title

Country of origin

Distributor

1

Flightplan

USA

Buena Vista

2

Inside Man

USA

Universal

3

Lucky Number Slevin

USAEntertainment

4

The Da Vinci Code

UK/USA

Sony Pictures

5

Wedding Crashers

USA

Entertainment

6

The Constant Gardener

UK/GerUniversal

7

Crash

USA/Ger

20th Century Fox

8

The Longest Yard

USASony Pictures

9

The Island

USA

Warner Bros

10

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest

USA

Buena Vista

Source: MRIB Rental Monitor, BVA.

114 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

The top UK-originated titles in the DVD rental video market are shown in Table 11.2. The top films were thrillers
The Da Vinci Code and The Constant Gardener, followed by Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.
Table 11.2 Top 10 UK-originated DVD rental titles, 2006
Title

Country of origin

Distributor

1

The Da Vinci Code

UK/USA

Sony Pictures

2

The Constant Gardener

UK/GerUniversal

3

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

UK/USA

Warner Bros

4

Nanny McPhee

UK/USA

Universal

5

Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit

UK/USA

Universal

6

V for Vendetta

UK/USA/Ger

Warner Bros

7

The Business

UK/USA/Sp

20th Century Fox

8Green Street

UK

Universal

9

Keeping Mum

UK/USA/IoM

Entertainment

10

Doom

UK/USA

Universal

Source: MRIB, RSU analysis.

Figure 11.2 shows the genre split of all titles rented in 2006. The most popular genre was comedy which
accounted for just over one in four rentals, closely followed by drama and thriller titles. Please note that thesecategories, as defined by MRIB, differ from the genre categories assigned to the theatrical market by the RSU
in chapter 7.
Sci-fi 2.9
Action/adventure 15.5
Thriller 16.0
Children’s/family 8.7
Horror 10.4

Documentary 0.6

Comedy 25.7
Drama 19.1
Source: MRIB Rental Monitor, BVA.

From left
Flight Plan, courtesy of Buena VistaHome Entertainment.
The Inside Man © Universal Studios.
All rights reserved.
11: Film on DVD | 115

11.2 Film in the retail video market
In total, 229 million DVD, HD DVDs, Blu-Ray DVDs, UMD and VHS videos were sold in 2006, with a total market
value of £2,161 million. DVDs accounted for the vast bulk of video sales (99%), with new digital formats such as
Blu-Ray and HD entering the market over the last year and VHS videos becoming all but obsolete. Feature film
represented approximately 72% of the retail video market (£1,556 million) and UK films accounted for around
19% of DVD film sales. Figure 11.3 demonstrates the rapid growth in the retail video sector, led by the high rateof increase in DVD sales from 2000–2004. In 2006, the volume of DVD sales increased by 7%, a slower rate of
growth than in the immediately preceding years. The value of sales overall dropped significantly for the second
successive year, reflecting lower DVD prices and the collapse of the VHS market for film (down to 0.8% of themarket by volume) compared with 5% in 2005.
Figure 11.3 Retail video sales, 1997–2006
million
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Volume(million)

87

100

96

114

135

169

208

234

222

229

Value
(£ million)

784

896

878

1,110

1,417

1,895

2,244

2,478

2,317

2,161

Source: Offical UK Charts Company, BVA.

Table 11.3 shows the top selling films on DVD in 2006. As with last year’s chart it reflects the top grossing box
office films of the last two years. Please note that this table includes theatrically released films listed in thechildren’s genre category by the Official UK Charts Company.
Table 11.3: Top 10 DVD retail sales, 2006
Title

Country of origin

Distributor

USA

Buena Vista

UK/USA

Warner Bros

1

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest

2

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

3

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch andthe Wardrobe

USA

Buena Vista

4

Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit

UK/USA

Paramount

5

Nanny McPhee

UK/USA

Universal

6

King Kong

USA/NZ

Universal

7

Ice Age 2

USA

20th Century Fox

8

The Da Vinci Code

UK/USA

Sony Pictures

9

Cars

USA

Buena Vista

10

Over the Hedge

USA

ParamountSource: Official UK Charts Company, BVA.

116 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Once again, comedy was the dominant genre of films sold on video in 2006, accounting for over 22% of themarket as Figure 11.4 shows. Action/adventure was the next most popular with one-fifth of all sales.
Table 11.4: Sales breakdown by film genre, 2006 (%)
Musical 3.2
Horror 6.8
Comedy 22.2

Sci-fi 7.7

Adult 0.4

Thriller 8.4
War 2.4

Action/adventure 19.2

Children’s/family 11.2
Western 1.0
Drama 17.5

Source: Official UK Charts Company.

The top 10 UK performers on sell-through DVD in 2006 are highlighted in Table 11.4. The popularity of recent
family films is clear with Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit andNanny McPhee among the popular titles released theatrically in 2005.
Table 11.4 Top 10 UK-originated DVD retail titles, 2006
Title

Country of origin

Distributor

1

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire

UK/USA

Warner Bros

2

Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit

UK/USA

Universal

3

Nanny McPhee

UK/USA

Universal

4

The Da Vinci Code

UK/USA

Sony Pictures5

Pride and Prejudice

UK/USA

Universal

6

The Corpse Bride

UK/USA

Warner Bros

7

Batman Begins

UK/USA

Warner Bros

8

Green Street

UK

Universal

9Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

UK/USA

Warner Bros

10

The Constant Gardener

UK

Universal

Source: Official UK Charts Company, RSU analysis.

11.3 Hardware
In the course of the year, 8.1 million DVD players were sold and it is estimated that 80% of households owned
a DVD player. This compares with 25% five years ago and 4% at the start of the decade.

From left
Nanny McPhee © Universal Studios.
All rights reserved.
The Constant Gardener© Universal Studios.
All rights reserved.
11: Film on DVD | 117

12: FILM ON UK TELEVISION
Opportunities to watch film on television have neverbeen wider, with multi-channel television gaining in
popularity. Viewing patterns have correspondingly
fragmented. Even so, one person in six in the UK
watched the year’s favourite TV film, Pirates of the
Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, on BBC1.

2,011 films wereshown on terrestrial
channels in 2006,
down 14% on 2005
but the proportion of
UK films increased

Multi-channel
television accounted
for over 33% of the
UK television audiencein 2006, up from
30% in 2005

A
E
B
L
L
’
U
O
“Y

118 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

An average of
1.5 million people
watched each film on
peak time television(down from 2 million
in 2005)

There were nearly fivetimes more films on
television in 2006 thana decade ago, largely asa result of subscription
film channels

E
M
A
N
D
L
O
H
E
S
U
O
H
The value of film tobroadcasters wasapproximately £1.07 billion

There were 3.3 billion
viewings of feature film
across all TV formats (except
Pay Per View) in 2006 –over 21 times the numberof cinema admissions
12: Film on UK television | 119

12.1 Programming
Table 12.1 shows the number of feature films broadcast on the five terrestrial network channels in 2006 andthe total number of UK titles broadcast in that time. These are broken down into older titles (more than eight
years old) and recent theatrical releases (released in the last eight years). Here, UK films include all titles listed
as UK-originated in the Broadcaster’s Audience Research Board (BARB) genre field, plus UK co-productions given
other nationalities (mostly USA) in the BARB data.
The number of films on terrestrial television decreased by 14% in 2006, but the proportion of recent UK films
increased to 5.2% from 4.4% in 2005.
Table 12.1 Feature films broadcast on network television, 2006

ChannelNumber offilm slots

Number of
UK film slots

UK films
as % of total

Recent UK(ie released
theatricallysince 1999)

BBC1

367

80

21.8

30

8.2

BBC2

397

103

25.9

20

5.0

ITV1

183

38

20.8

9

4.9

Channel 4

580

181

31.2

42

7.2

Five

484

36

7.4

4

0.8

Total

2,011

438

21.8

105

5.2

Recent UK as %of total film slot

Source: DGA Metrics, UK Film Council RSU.

As Table 12.2 shows, only 41 foreign language films were broadcast in 2006, 2% of the total, down from 61
in 2005 (2.6% of the total).
Table 12.2 Foreign language films broadcast on network television, 2006
ChannelNumber of
foreign language
films broadcast

BBC1

2

0.5

BBC2

2

ITV1

% of channel’s Average audiencefilm output(million)

Top rated foreign
language film

Audience(million)

0.5

Jet Li’s the Defender

0.6

0.5

0.2

The Damned

0.2

0

0.0

0.0

Channel 4

35

6.0

0.2

Downfall

2.0

Five

2

0.4

0.7 Jackie Chan’s Police Story

0.8

Total

41

2.0

0.2

0.0

Source: DGA Metrics, UK Film Council RSU.

From left
The Bourne Identity, distributedby Universal Pictures.
Downfall, courtesy ofMomentum Pictures.
120 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

The number of slots for feature film on network television has declined since 2001 as Figure 12.1 shows.
Figure 12.1 Number of feature films on network television, 2001–2005
millions
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

BBC1

339

342

432

434

356

367

BBC2

516

388

448

498

425

397

ITV1

284

255

310

270

373

183

Channel 4

616

544

587

506

563

580

Five

641

574

562

529

608

484

Total

2,396

2,103

2,339

2,237

2,325

2,011

Source: UK Film Council RSU, DGA Metrics.

The 2006 total of 2,011 films is the lowest since our data collection began in 1997, when 2,807 films were shownon terrestrial television.
12.2 Peak time
The proportion of peak-time hours (18:00 to 23:59 hours) given over to films varied widely across the terrestrial
channels. Film represented 20% of programming on BBC1, 9.5% on BBC2, 7.4% on ITV1, 21% on Channel 4 and27.2% on Five (Figure 12.2).
Figure 12.2 Composition of peak-time hours, 2006
Percentage
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
BBC1

BBC2

ITV1

Channel 4

Five

Film (made for TV)

0.7

0.2

0.0

0.2

1.1

Total
0.5

Other

2.8

11.4

2.5

5.9

1.8

4.8

Sport

10.8

14.6

9.5

0.1

7.1

8.8

Film (cinema)

19.9

9.5

7.4

20.9

27.2

17.0

News/current affairs

22.3

15.5

19.6

21.6

9.4

18.0

Entertainment

12.0

11.8

14.7

10.2

5.5

11.0

Factual

12.5

34.7

12.0

35.4

25.7

23.2

Drama

19.0

2.4

34.2

5.7

22.1

16.7

Source: DGA Metrics.

12: Film on UK television | 121

The total number of broadcast hours for film per channel in peak time is shown in Figure 12.3. Channel Fivetransmitted 382 hours of film at peak times over 2006, whereas ITV1 showed 81 hours.
Figure 12.3 Hours of film peak-time, 2006
Hours
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0

BBC1

BBC2

ITV1

Channel 4

Five

131

98

81

243

382

Source: DGA Metrics, BARB.

12.3 Audiences for film on network television
The average audience for a film shown on peak-time network television was 1.4 million on BBC1, 900,000 on
BBC2, 2.4 million on ITV1, 1.6 million on Channel 4 and 1.2 million on Five (Figure 12.4). This compares with themedian cinema admissions for top 50 films of approximately 1.7 million.
Of the main programme categories, film accounts for the second lowest average peak-time audience on BBC1
and BBC2 but performs relatively well on Five, as shown in Figure 12.5.
Figure 12.4 Average audience for peak-time film, 2006
(000s)
3,000

2,000

1,000

0

BBC1

BBC2

ITV1

Channel 4

Five

1,383

917

2,400

1,595

1,190

Source: BARB, DGA Metrics.

122 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Figure 12.5 Average peak-time audience, 2006
(000s)
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
BBC1

BBC2

ITV1

Channel 4

Five

Drama

6,410

1,684

7,223

1,830

1,837

Entertainment

4,589

1,914

4,459

1,661

766

Factual

3,762

2,158

3,407

2,566

927

Film (cinema)

1,383

917

2,400

1,595

1,190

Film (made for TV)

839

870

0

2,226

1,016

News/current affairs

3,739

939

3,222

912

532

Other

2,016

1,006

1,069

662

500

Sport

3,200

1,673

3,469

300

855

All genres

3,756

1,607

4,704

1,755

1,142

Source: DGA Metrics BARB.

The most popular film on terrestrial television was Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, with
9.5 million viewers tuning in to its premiere showing on BBC1 (Table 12.3). In theatrical terms, this is equivalent toa box office gross of £46 million (actual gross was £28 million). Four of the top 10 were UK-originated titles.
Table 12.3 Top 10 films on network television, 2006
Title

ChannelCountry oforiginYear oftheatrical release

Audience(million)

1

Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl

BBC1

USA

2003

9.5

2

Calendar Girls

BBC1

UK/USA

2003

8.0

3

Bruce Almighty

BBC1

USA

2003

7.5

4

Mrs Henderson Presents

BBC1

UK

2005

7.0

5

Catch Me If You Can

BBC1

USA

2002

6.1

6

Love Actually

ITV1

UK/USA

2003

5.5

7

Die Another Day

ITV1

UK/USA

2002

5.3

8

The Scorpion King

ITV1

USA

2002

5.2

9

Monsters Inc

BBC1

USA

2001

5.2

10

Con Air

BBC1

USA

1997

5.2

Source: BARB, DGA Metrics.

12: Film on UK television | 123

The top 10 UK films of 2006, shown in Table 12.4, included the premiere showings of four recent British films:
Calendar Girls, Mrs Henderson Presents, Love Actually and Johnny English.
Table 12.4 Top 10 UK-originated films on network television, 2006
Title

ChannelCountry oforiginYear oftheatrical release

Audience(million)1

Calendar Girls

BBC1

UK/USA

2003

8.0

2

Mrs Henderson Presents

BBC1

UK

2005

7.0

3

Love Actually

ITV1

UK/USA

2003

5.5

4

Die Another Day

ITV1

UK/USA

2002

5.3

5

Chicken Run

BBC1

UK/USA

2000

5.2

6

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets

ITV1

UK/USA

2002

5.1

7

Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone

ITV1

UK/USA

2001

4.9

8

Johnny English

BBC1

UK/USA

2003

4.1

9

About a Boy

BBC1

UK/USA

2002

3.8

10

Billy Elliot

BBC1

UK/Fra2000

3.4

Source: BARB, DGA Metrics.

12.4 Films on multi-channel television
Table 12.5 shows the audience share for freeview/satellite/cable multi-channel television has continued to growin the last few years. Multi-channel TV accounted for 33% of the UK television audience in 2006, up from 30%
in 2005.
Table 12.5 Television percentage audience shares, 1999–2006
Year

BBC1

BBC2

ITV1

Channel 4

Five Multi-channel TV

1999

28.4

10.8

31.2

10.3

5.4

14.0

2000

27.2

10.8

29.3

10.5

5.7

16.6

2001

26.9

11.1

26.7

10.0

5.8

19.6

2002

26.2

11.4

24.1

10.0

6.3

22.1

2003

25.6

11.0

23.7

9.4

6.5

23.6

2004

24.7

10.0

22.8

9.7

6.6

26.2

2005

23.3

9.4

21.5

9.6

6.4

29.8

2006

22.8

8.8

19.6

9.8

5.7

33.3

Source: BARB.

From left
Mrs Henderson Presents,
courtesy of Pathé Distribution.
Love Actually, distributedby Universal Pictures.
124 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

A wide range of film channels is available across all digital platforms. Table 12.6 lists the number of films shown,average audience, top film and audience for a selection of the top subscription movie channels (highlighted) andother multi-channels which broadcast feature films.
Table 12.6 Feature film on a selection of digital channels, 2006
Number offilms broadcast

Averagefilm audience

Top film

Audience for
top film

BBC3 and BBC4

272

227,000

Cast Away

719,000

UKTV Gold

170

189,000

Sister Act 2: Back in the Habit

721,000

ITV2–4

1,345

171,000

Die Another Day

1,560,000

Sky 1–3

150

161,000

Independence Day

658,000

Film4

926

135,000

The Shawshank Redemption

1,110,000

More 4482

70,000

The Green Mile

366,000

1,215

43,000The Mummy

315,000

Disney Channel/Cinemagic

823

35,000The Incredibles

367,000

FX

206

23,000Under Siege 2116,000

Hallmark

269

21,000

Jason and the Argonauts

128,000

Sky Movies 1–10

33,51017,000

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion,
the Witch and the Wardrobe

652,000

Turner Classic Movies

4,802

12,000Willy Wonka and the
Chocolate Factory

241,900

704

11,000

Muhammad Ali

78,000Zone Horror/Zone Thriller

1,758

9,000

I Spit on your Grave

87,000Sky Cinema 1 and 2

8,331

5,000

The Warriors

142,000

ChannelSci Fi Channel

True Movies

Source: UK Film Council RSU, DGA Metrics, BARB.
The data for Film4 refers to the period following free-to-air switchover on 23 July 2006.
The darker shaded channels are movie subscription channels, and the lighter shaded channels are free to air digital channels which show films.

The top film on subscription movie channels in 2006 was The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and theWardrobe, which attracted 652,000 viewers on Sky Movies (Table 12.7). The top film on free-to-air multi-channel
was Die Another Day on ITV2 with an audience of almost 1.6 million (Table 12.8).

12: Film on UK television | 125

Table 12.7 Top 10 feature films on pay-TV film channels, 2006
Title

ChannelCountry oforiginYear oftheatricalreleaseAudience

1

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion,
the Witch and the Wardrobe

Sky Movies 1

USA/NZ

2005

650,000

2

Hitch

Sky Movies 1

USA

2005

590,000

3

King Arthur

Sky Movies 1

UK/USA/Ire

2004

530,000

4

Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith

Sky Movies 1

USA

2005

530,000

5

The 40 Year Old Virgin

Sky Movies 1

USA

2005

510,000

6

National Treasure

Sky Movies 1

USA

2004

490,000

7

The War of the Worlds

Sky Movies 2

USA

2005

490,000

8

The Pacifier

Sky Movies 2

USA

2005

470,000

9

Starsky and Hutch

Sky Movies 2

USA

2004

470,000

10

Assault on Precinct 13

Sky Movies 2

USA

2005

460,000

ChannelCountry oforiginYear oftheatricalreleaseAudience

Source: DGA Metrics, BARB.

Table 12.8 Top 10 feature films on digital multi-channel television, 2006
Title

1

Die Another Day

ITV2

UK/USA

2002

1,560,000

2

The Shawshank Redemption

Film4

USA

1994

1,110,000

3GoldenEye

ITV2

UK/USA

1995

970,000

4

Die Another Day

ITV2

UK/USA

2002

950,000

5

Jurassic Park III

ITV2

USA

2001

910,000

6

The Bourne Identity

ITV2

USA

2002

900,000

7

The Mummy Returns

ITV2

UK/USA

2001

890,000

8

Jurassic Park III

ITV2

USA

2001

870,000

9

Crocodile Dundee IIITV2

Aus/USA

1988

860,000

10

Lost in Translation

Film4

USA

2003

850,000

Source: DGA Metrics, BARB.

126 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

12.5. The audience for film on television, 1997–2006
In order to compare the audiences for film on television with the total number of admissions to UK cinemas,
we have calculated the sum of the average audience for film broadcast on UK television since 1997 (see Figure
12.6 and Table 1.1). In 1997 there were almost 4 billion viewings of film on TV, compared with cinema ticket salesof 139 million. However, the audience for film on television has been in decline since then, despite the massive
upsurge in the availability of titles since the introduction of digital television. In 2006 there were 3.3 billion
television viewings compared with 157 million cinema ticket sales. In 1997, the average person watched 72 films
per year on terrestrial and multi-channel television, but by 2006, even with the massive growth in choice via
digital, the number of films viewed per person per year fell to 60. The one growth area has been film viewing
on non-subscription digital channels, and this looks set to continue with Film4 now available on Freeview.
Figure 12.7 shows the total number of films shown on television since 1997. The steep rise in film showings to2003 has since flattened but the 64,355 total in 2006 is more than four and a half times greater than the 1997
figure of 14,070 films. The subscription film channels and digital multi-channel TV have driven this increase.
Unfortunately, the lack of comprehensive title-by-title audience data available to us for Pay-Per-View movie services
such as Sky Box Office and Home Choice means we cannot include these data in the following charts.
Figure 12.6 Total audience for feature film on television (except PPV), 1997–2006
millions
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Terrestrial

3,209

3,148

3,328

2,901

2,929

2,601

2,822

2,579

2,350

1,949

Subscription 707
movie
channels

594

502

647

673

741

820

734

671

634

0

0

0

0

0

75

268

305

374

722

3,916

3,742

3,830

3,548

3,602

3,417

3,921

3,618

3,394

3,305

Free-to-air
multichannel
Total

From left
The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion,
the Witch and the Wardrobe, courtesyof Buena Vista Home Entertainment.
The Shawshank Redemption, courtesyof ITV Plc (Granada Int’l)/LFI.
12: Film on UK television | 127

Figure 12.7 Total number of films broadcast on all television (except PPV), 1997–2006
millions
70,00060,00050,00040,00030,00020,00010,000
0

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Terrestrial

2,807

2,737

2,525

2,318

2,401

2,275

2,355

2,234

2,325

2,011

Subscription 12,067
moviechannels

12,68436,54740,277

46,72052,55247,49947,69844,34644,346

0

0

0

0

0

4,573

7,900

8,821

13,144

17,99814,07014,804

15,20938,86542,68253,56862,80758,554

63,16864,355Free-to-air
multichannel
Total

12.6 The value of feature film to broadcasters
Based on a model developed by DGA Metrics, we have estimated the value of feature film to UK broadcasters tobe approximately £1.07 billion in 2006. This figure is derived from the annual revenue per channel, that is net
advertising revenue for the commercial channels, subscription revenues for the pay TV channels and proportionof licence fee applied to television programmes on the BBC channels multiplied by the percentage of broadcast
hours for feature film.

From left
King Arthur, courtesy of Buena VistaHome Entertainment.
128 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

See also:
3 For cinema admissions see chapter 1 on (p10)
3 For an overview of the film market as a whole
see chapter 13 on (p130)

Above
Die Another Day © 2002 Danjaq, LLC
and United Artists Corporation.
All rights reserved.
12: Film on UK television | 129

“LESell-throughDVD/video
accounted for thelargest share(42%) of UK film
revenues

TM

E SE

Sell-throughrevenues boomed
between 2000
and 2004

13: THE UK FILM MARKET AS A WHOLE
While much of the publicity and media attention
for films occurs around the cinema release, it is thefilm market as a whole that recovers the costs ofproduction and marketing and makes profits (or not)for film producers and investors. The sale and rental
of DVDs/videos are particularly important forfilmmakers and distributors in revenue terms andsales to television also generate significant income.
This chapter looks at the UK film market as a wholeover the period 1998–2006.
130 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

EFilm revenues
in the UK peakedin 2004 and thendeclinedsignificantly

EVO

Film piracy andcompetition from new
digital leisure activities,
particularly online
entertainment are creatinga plateau in film
revenues

LUT
ION

The UK had thethird largest filmed
entertainment
market in the world
after the USA andJapan (2005)

Research suggeststhat the decreasing
theatrical window has
not so far contributed
to the fall in UK cinema
admissions

13: The UK film market as a whole | 131

13.1 The UK filmed entertainment market as a whole
Table 13.1 shows the complete UK filmed entertainment market in 2005 and 2006. In both years, sell-throughDVD/video was the largest single revenue source, accounting for 42% of total revenues in 2006. Theatricalrevenues fell slightly to £762 million, while rental revenues shrank from £399 million to £340 million.
Gross television revenues were also large, at £1.1 billion, though much of this accrued to the television industry
rather than to the suppliers of film.
For UK films, the distribution of revenues is estimated to be slightly different from films overall, with a smaller
share of revenues attributable to television. This reflects the comparatively larger number of overseas film titles
shown on UK television.
Table 13.1 The UK filmed entertainment market, 2005/06
Total grossvalue(£ million)
2005

Attributable to
UK films(£ million)
2005

Total grossvalue(£ million)
2006

Attributable to
UK films(£ million)
2006

Theatrical

770

254

762

145

DVD/video rental

399

89

340

58

1,784

375

1,556

296

Pay-TV

706

85

642

86

Terrestrial TV

325

75

277

56

‘Free’ multi-channel TV

85

13

147

32

4,069

891

3,724

673

Window

Sell-through DVD/video

Total UK

Sources: Nielsen EDI, MRIB, BVA, Official Charts Company, DGA, RSU Analysis.
Theatrical is the total gross UK theatrical revenues (including VAT) for all films released in the UK in 2005 and 2006, box office up to 19 February 2006 for the 2005
films and 4 March 2007 for the 2006 films. See Chapter 1.
UK rental is the total revenue from UK DVD/video rental transactions in the calendar years 2005 and 2006. See Chapter 11.
Sell-through video is the total revenue from UK DVD/video retail transactions in the calendar years 2005 and 2006. See Chapter 11.
The TV values are retail-equivalent values calculated from the dataset of films shown on UK television generated for the UKFC by DGA. Values are estimatedby multiplying the film share of the total channel time by the total revenue applicable to that channel (licence fee, subscription or advertising revenue).
See Chapter 12.
The above values are gross values and include exhibitor and distributor margins, VAT, prints and advertising costs, DVD/video retail margins, broadcaster andmulti-channel TV operator margins, in addition to net returns to the film production sector and film investors.
The revenues shown here are revenues earned by film in the UK market whether UK or foreign films. The table does not include export revenues for the UK film
industry. See Chapter 16 for UK film export revenues.

13.2 The UK market in the global context
Table 13.2 places the UK’s filmed entertainment market in a global context. In 2005, the UK had the third-largest
filmed entertainment market in the world, after the USA and Japan. The USA accounted for 43% of the world
market. The next biggest territories after the UK were Canada, Germany, France, Italy and South Korea. The world
filmed entertainment market is still dominated by the largest developed economies. Although the Indian market isvast in terms of admissions and both India and China have huge populations and are growing fast economically,
their filmed entertainment markets still count in US dollar terms below Australia (population 21 million) and Spain(population 44.7 million).

132 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 13.2 Filmed entertainment revenues US$ by country/region, 2005
Country/region

Revenue ($US million)

USA

34,399

Japan

7,701

UK

6,604

Canada5,065

Other Western Europe

5,020

Germany

3,113France2,800

Other Asia Pacific

2,512

Italy

2,060

South Korea

1,862

Latin America

1,767

Australia

1,713

Spain

1,653

China

1,361

India

1,321

Central and Eastern Europe

1,170

Middle East and Africa

352

World total

80,473

Source: PricewaterhouseCoopers, Global Entertainment and Media Outlook 2006–2010, 2006.
Filmed entertainment revenue includes box office receipts, home DVD/video (rental and retail) and online and streaming revenues. It does not include TV revenues.

13.3 The evolution of UK film revenues, 1998–2006
The evolution of UK film revenues from 1998 to 2006 is shown in Figure 13.1. Theatrical revenues
grew significantly in the late 1990s, but then only slightly from 2002 to 2006, with increases in ticket prices
compensating for the decline in admissions. DVD/video rental revenues grew slightly until 2002 but have slumped
significantly since then. Television revenues appear to have remained fairly constant since 2002. Revenue growthover the period was driven substantially by sell-through DVD/video, with the main contributor being the DVDboom from 2000 onwards. However, in the last two years retail DVD/video revenues have also slipped.
While cinema admissions peaked in 2002 (see Chapter 1), the film market overall seems to have peaked in 2004.

From left
Walk the Line © 2005 TwentiethCentury Fox. All rights reserved.
The Queen,courtesy of Pathé Distribution.
13. The UK film market as a whole | 133

Figure 13.1 Gross film revenues, all windows, 1998–2006£ million
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Film on TV

726

755

826

954

1,066

1,182

1,119

1,089

1,066

Retail film

690

676

847

1,091

1,459

1,728

1,908

1,784

1,556

Rental film

437

408

444

465

476

450

461

399

340

Theatrical

547

563

583

645

755

742

770

770

762

Source: Nielsen EDI, MRIB, BVA, Official Charts Company, DGA, RSU Analysis.

The revenues shown in Figure 13.1 are the actual figures. If we adjust the revenues for inflation using therecreational and cultural services price index (Figure 13.2), the decline in revenue since 2004 is more marked.
In 2005, real revenues slipped to the level of 2002 and in 2006 slipped again to roughly the level of 2001.
Figure 13.2 Gross inflation-adjusted film revenues, all windows, expressed in 2005 sterling, 1998–2006£ million in 2005
5,000
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Film on TV

914.4

921.9

985.7

1113.2

1,170.1

1,256.1

1,160.8

1,089.0

1,019.1

Retail film

868.9

825.5

1,010.7

1,273.2

1,601.7

1,836.2

1,979.3

1,784.1

1,487.5

Rental film

550.4

498.2

529.8

542.6

522.5

478.2

478.2

399.0

325.0

Theatrical

688.9

687.4

695.7

752.6

828.8

788.5

798.8

770.0

728.5

Sources: Nielsen EDI, MRIB, BVA, Official Charts Company, DGA, ONS, RSU Analysis.
Actual revenues deflated by the UK recreational and cultural services price index, using the year to December 2005 as the base.

There are a number of possible reasons for the decline in film revenues. It could relate to the film product or
the way it is delivered; it could reflect stronger competition from other industries for consumer time and money;
it could be the result of piracy; or some combination of these factors. As the UK economy has continued to growthrough the period in question, it is unlikely there is a macro-economic explanation for the decline.
In thinking about the issue, it should be remembered from our analysis of the theatrical market in Chapter 1, thatthe plateau in consumption of film appears to be confined to the top 50 titles in each year. Revenues for titles
ranked 51–150 and the rest of the market have continued to grow strongly (at least on the theatrical side) overthe last five years.
To explore the reasons for the decline in film revenues, the UK Film Council commissioned or participated in threestudies in 2006/07 relating to trends in the market for film. These looked at: the role of digital leisure substitutes;
the effects of the falling theatrical window; and (with the British Video Association and other industry partners)
film piracy. The results of these studies are summarised below.

134 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

13.4 The impact of new digital leisure activities
In October 2006, the UK Film Council commissioned a study into the plateau in cinema attendances anddrop in DVD/video sales in the UK, which focused particularly on the role of new digital leisure activities.
This study was published in April 2007 and can be found on the UK Film Council website at
http://www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk/usr/downloads/plateau.doc
Using official consumer spending and time-use data the study found that:• There was a marked age differentiation in the fall in cinema attendances, with the 25–44 age group
showing a particularly large fall. Cinema attendance by the 15–24 age group peaked almost a decade ago.
Cinema attendance by the older age group (45+) continued growing until 2004.
• There has been a marked increase in the average household budget devoted to satellite and cable TV
subscriptions, video games and internet subscriptions, while spending on cinema and DVD/video hasplateaued.
• Between 2000–2005, there was a marked shift in consumer time-use from live entertainment, TV, DVD/video,
radio and music to computer and on-line activities.
• The move away from DVD/video towards internet use appears to have been particularly strong among
15–24 year olds.
These findings support anecdotal and industry evidence of the surge in online activity by young people inparticular. The significance of the findings is that they establish that some of the growth in time and money
spent on new digital leisure activities has been directly at the expense of time and money spent in traditional
leisure activities such as watching films.
13.5 Has the fall in the length of the theatrical window reduced cinema admissions?
One possible explanation for the pressure on cinema admissions is the fall in the average length of the theatricalwindow, (the time between the cinema release of a film and its release on DVD/video). This gap has dropped
significantly in the last seven years, from 190 days (27 weeks) at the beginning of 1999 to 126 days (18 weeks)
in early 2006, as shown in Figure 13.3.
Figure 13.3 Average theatrical window, 1999–2006
days
200
190
180
170
160
150
140
130
120
110
1999Q2

2000Q1

2000Q4

2001Q3

2002Q2

2003Q1

2003Q4

2004Q3

2005Q2

2006Q1

Window
length 189.667

194.52

186.75164.08173.069

171.378151.517135.312134.773

125.667

Trend

187.5

186

181

178

170

150

135

128

125

100

189.67

Source: Nielsen EDI, MRIB, RSU, Hasan Bakhshi.
Theatrical window is defined as the number of days separating a film's cinema release date from its DVD or VHS rental release date
(whichever of the two comes first). The 'trend' line denotes a polynomial trend.

13. The UK film market as a whole | 135

To test the hypothesis that the falling window has cannibalised theatrical admissions, the UK Film Council
commissioned an analysis of the relationship between the box office and the theatrical window in the UK.
This study was published in April 2007 and can be found on the UK Film Council’s website at
http://www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk/usr/downloads/Theatrical%20window.doc.
The study used multi-variable econometric techniques to separate the impact of the theatrical window from othervariables affecting box office returns. Key findings were:• There was robust evidence that the growing importance of the DVD market over time was an important factor
in explaining the trend towards shorter theatrical windows.
• At any one time, theatrical windows were closely bunched around the median despite wide differences in therelative box office and DVD/video performances of different titles. This suggests that window length has been
determined institutionally rather than by unfettered market forces.
• There was no statistically significant relationship between box office returns and window length, suggestingthat box office revenues have not been cannibalised to date by DVD/video transactions.
• There was strong evidence that windows fell by more in 2004–2006 than could be explained by the set ofvariables examined in the study. Prime candidates for the ‘other factors’ were film piracy and competition fromnew digital leisure technologies.
While the finding of this study was that box office revenues have not been affected by the shorter window,
this finding holds only as far as the current evidence goes, which is to a window length of around 15 weeks.
Below that, there could be a threshold below which cannibalisation might occur, but it is not possible to tellfrom this particular study where the threshold might be.
13.6 The impact of film piracy
With the development of digital technology, including cheap methods of burning DVDs, the film industry has
become increasingly concerned about the impact of film piracy on legal sales of film over the last five or six years.
The industry’s enforcement body, the Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT) has adopted strategies to combat
wide-scale commercial piracy utilising the new technology. The UK Film Council is a member of FACT and has
participated with industry partners in the British Video Association piracy research group. This group contracted
IPSOS to conduct an annual survey of film and TV piracy, the latest wave of which was carried out in November
2006. The research was based on a sample survey of the UK population, asking a series of questions relating topirate consumption in general and the impact on particular high-profile titles released in 2006.
The aggregate loss to the industry of film piracy was estimated to be £388 million in 2006. This is the estimatedimpact on legal sales of the acquisition and viewing of pirate material. The breakdown is shown in Table 13.3.

136 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 13.3 The impact of film piracy on legal sales of film, 2006
Loss to industry(£ million)

Mode of release

Theatrical102

DVD rental

21

DVD retail238

PPV and downloads

27

Total loss to film

388

Loss to TV

71

Total loss to film and TV

459

Source: IPSOS.
The results relate to the year 2006 and use an improved methodology designed to assess not only the impact of people directly engaged in acquiring pirate copies
of films but also the impact on legal sales of borrowing or viewing pirated material.
If the 2005 estimation methodology is applied to the 2006 survey results, the 2006 estimate would be equivalent to £699 million, suggesting a slight decreaseon the £720 million estimated in 2005.
The preferred estimate of the loss to the industry in 2006 is £459 million. The purpose of applying the 2005 estimation methodology to the 2006 results is toprovide a consistent measure of change between 2005/06.

These numbers are significant in relation to the legal markets. The estimated loss to the box office of £102 million
is equivalent to 13.4% of the legal market in the UK, while the estimated loss to DVD retail of £238 million isequivalent to 15% of the legal market.
Other findings were:• The criminal gain from counterfeit and home-copied DVDs was estimated to be £169 million.
• The overall level of piracy in 2006 was slightly lower than in 2005.
• 29% of the population had acquired or viewed some type of pirate film material in 2006.
• Physical piracy and borrowing were still the main forms of film piracy, but declined compared with 2005.
• The proportion of the population downloading and burning was stable at around 5%, but the number of titles
downloaded/burnt increased by 26% between 2005 and 2006.
• The two main reasons given for not downloading were “don’t know how to do it” (33%) and “too much
effort” (30%), suggesting that the industry will have to work hard to persuade people not to engage in online
film theft as technology and skills improve over the next few years.
• Downloaders were roughly equal male and female and predominantly in the age groups 15–21 and 22–34.

See also:
3 For information on the export revenuesof the UK film industry, see chapter 16 (p160)
From left
Brokeback Mountain, courtesyof Entertainment Film Distributors.
Children of Men, distributedby Universal Pictures.
The Wind that Shakes the Barley,
courtesy of Pathé Pictures
International.
13. The UK film market as a whole | 137

“LE
T’S
MA
KE
Five US majors
accounted foralmost two-thirdsof the UK spend
associated withinward investment
features2006 saw
a 46% increasein UK production
activity to £842
million from£577 million
in 2005

14: FILM PRODUCTIONThe UK film industry is both an independent creatorof feature films and a provider of services to theinternational film industry. In 2006, UK production
activity bounced back from the lower level of 2005,
reaching £842 million, the second highest year onrecord. This reflects greater industry confidence after
the announcement of the UK’s new film tax relief.
This chapter looks at trends since 1992, based on
production statistics collected by the UK Film Council.
138 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

The UK spend
associated withinward investment
features jumped
84% from£309 million
to £570 million

The number of
UK domestic features
increased significantly,
from 39 in 2005
to 50 in 2006; however
their median budget
fell significantly

AM
OVI
E
The numberof UK co-productions
continued to fall,though the UK spend
increased comparedwith 2005

Budgets forinward investment
films increased
substantially, reflecting
the higher number ofbig-budget studio films
made in the UK
in 2006

14: Film production | 139

14.1 The value of UK production in 2006
UK production activity rose to £842 million in 2006, reversing 2005’s dip to £577 million and making 2006 thesecond highest production year on record after 2003. This reflected the greater degree of confidence in theindustry as a result of the announcement of the new system of tax incentives for UK film (see section 14.10) andtransitional arrangements to cover films in production in 2006.
There were 27 inward investment productions in 2006, with a UK production value of £570 million (see Table 14.1
for definitions). Some of the big-budget films contributing to this figure were Casino Royale, Harry Potter and theOrder of the Phoenix, His Dark Materials: The Golden Compass, 10,000BC and The Bourne Ultimatum.
There were 50 UK domestic features in 2006 (up from 39 in 2005) with a UK production value of £148 million.
Larger-budget films contributing to this total included Mr Bean’s Holiday, Atonement, Definitely Maybe and
The Magic Flute.
UK co-productions (other than inward) fell from 67 to 57, but with an increase in UK spend from £96 million
to £125 million. UK co-productions in 2006 included Closing the Ring, Death Defying Acts, A Mighty Heartand Becoming Jane.
Table 14.1 Feature film production activity, 2005/06
Number of
productions
2005

Value
(£ million)
2005

Number of
productions
2006

Value
(£ million)
2006

Inward feature films (single country)

19

237.5

25

502.8

Inward feature films (co-productions)

6

71.2

2

66.8

Total inward investment

25

308.7

27

569.6

UK domestic feature films

39

172.1

50

148.0

UK co-productions (other than inward)

67

96.3

57

124.8

Total production investment

131

577.0

134

842.4

Source: UK Film Council.
Data for 2005 updated since publication of the 2005/06 Yearbook.
The apparently lower UK spend associated with domestic UK features reflects more accurate UK spend statistics rather than an actual decrease in spend.
Definitions
1. An inward feature is defined as a feature film more than 50% financed from outside the UK and where the production is attracted to the UK because of its
infrastructure or locations.
2. An inward feature co-production is an official co-production that originates from outside the co-production treaty countries (usually from the USA) andwhich is attracted to the UK because of its facilities, services and crew.
3. A UK domestic feature is a feature made by a UK production company that is shot wholly or partly in the UK.
4. A UK co-production is a co-production (other than an inward co-production) involving the UK and other country partners under the terms of a bilateral coproduction agreement or the European Co-production Convention.
Measurement
5. The above numbers include only the UK spend associated with productions shooting in whole or part in the UK.
6. Spend is allocated to the calendar year in which principal photography started.
Exclusions
7. Spending on films with budgets under £500,000 is not included.

From left
28 Weeks Later, courtesy of DNA Films andTwentieth Century Fox. All rights reserved.
Becoming Jane © 2006. Becoming Jane
Films Limited, Scion Films Premier (Third)
Limited Partnership and the UK Film Council.
All rights reserved. Distributed by Buena
Vista International (UK).
140 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

14.2 Inward, domestic and UK co-production features, 1992–2006
Figure 14.1 and Table 14.2 put the 2006 figures in a longer time perspective. The decline in UK domestic features
between 1997–2005 occurred alongside a substantial growth in co-production activity, suggesting it was easier
to make films as official co-productions than as stand-alone UK productions. In 2006, there was an increase indomestic productions and a decline in co-productions and this trend is likely to strengthen as the new tax rules
take effect (the new tax incentive is based on UK spend rather than the total budget). The number of inward
features returned to the levels reached in 2000 and 2003 and overall production numbers maintained a high levelcompared to the early 1990s, before the introduction of tax relief and Lottery support for UK film.
Figure 14.1 Number of inward, UK domestic, UK co-production and total features, 1992–2006
Number of features
200

150

100

50

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

UK coproductions

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

66

99

84

67

57

UK
domestic
features

22

25

33

34

73

84

67

70

52

51

37

44

27

39

50

Inwardfeatures

8

15

13

14

25

20

16

22

28

23

16

30

20

25

27

0

Source: UK Film Council.
Inward features includes inward investment co-productions from 2002.
UK co-productions not available by shoot date prior to 2002.
Data for 2004 and 2005 updated since publication of the 2005/06 Yearbook.

From left
Sunshine, courtesy of DNA Films
and Twentieth Century Fox.
All rights reserved.
His Dark Materials: The Golden
Compass, courtesy of Entertainment
Film Distributors.
14: Film production | 141

Table 14.2 Number of inward, UK domestic, UK co-production and total features, 1992–2006
UK
co-production

InwardUK domestic

Total

1992

8

22

30

1993

15

25

40

1994

13

33

46

1995

14

34

48

1996

25

73

98

1997

20

84

104

1998

16

67

83

1999

22

70

92

2000

28

52

80

2001

23

51

74

2002

16

37

66

119

2003

30

44

99

173

2004

20

27

84

131

2005

25

39

67

131

2006

27

50

57

134

Source: UK Film Council.
Inward features includes inward investment co-productions from 2002.
UK co-productions not available by shoot date prior to 2002.
Data for 2004 and 2005 updated since publication of the 2005/06 Yearbook.

The value of UK production in 2006 bounced back from 2005’s level, making 2006 the second best year on record
after 2003 (Figure 14.2 and Table 14.3). Since 1997, the fluctuation in production value has principally been driven
by inward features, showing the importance of inward investment to the UK film economy. The combined valueof UK domestic features and co-productions was roughly the same in 2006 as in 2005.

From left
Nightwatching, courtesy ofContent Film International.
Sparkle, courtesy of Vertigo Films.
142 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Figure 14.2 Value of UK spend of inward, UK domestic, UK co-production and total features, 1992–2006£ millions
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
UK coproductions

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

0

0

0

0

0

0

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

0 128.23 158.87 143.37

96.31

124.85000UK
domestic
features

39.98

30.34

59.51

94.00 172.20 202.89 174.96 170.31 211.70 180.12 156.36 269.33 117.81 172.06

147.96

Inwardfeatures58.50

127.74 182.65

216.45 387.10 261.90 214.20 336.37 366.57 198.50 265.86 729.54 548.49 308.66

569.60Source: UK Film Council.
Inward features includes inward investment co-productions from 2002.
UK co-productions not available by shoot date prior to 2002.
Data for 2004 and 2005 updated since publication of the 2005/06 Yearbook.

Table 14.3 Value of UK spend of inward, UK domestic, UK co-production and total features, 1992–2006
UK
Co-productions(£ million)

Inward(£ million)

Domestic(£ million)

Total(£ million)

1992

58.50

39.98

98.48

1993

127.7430.34

158.081994

182.6559.51

242.16

1995

216.4594.00

310.45

1996

387.10172.2

559.301997

261.90202.89464.791998

214.20174.96389.16

1999

336.37170.31506.682000

366.57211.70578.27

2001

198.50180.12378.62

2002

265.86156.36128.23550.45

2003

729.54269.33158.871157.742004

548.49117.81143.37809.67

2005

308.66172.0696.31

577.03

2006

569.60147.96124.85842.41

Source: UK Film Council.
Inward features includes inward investment co-productions from 2002.
UK co-productions not available by shoot date prior to 2002.
Data for 2004 and 2005 updated since publication of the 2005/06 Yearbook.
The apparently lower UK spend associated with domestic UK features in 2006 reflects better UK spend statistics rather than an actual decrease in spend.

14: Film production | 14314.3 Budget trends
For the second year in a row the median budget of domestic UK features declined substantially, to £1.5 million in
2006, half the 2003 figure, suggesting that the UK film sector is under considerable market pressure (Table 14.4).
The median budget for co-productions increased slightly and the median budgets for inward investment films
increased substantially, reflecting the larger number of high budget US major-funded productions attracted
to the UK.
Table 14.4 Median feature film budgets, 2003–2006
Production category

2003

2004

Median budget (£ million)
2005
2006

Inward features (single country)

12.1

16.5

15.0

18.7

Inward features (co-productions)

46.6

38.1

33.6

51.9

Domestic UK productions

3.0

2.9

2.3

1.5

Co-productions (other than inward)

3.5

4.4

4.3

4.5

Source: UK Film Council.
Median budget is the middle value (ie there are equal numbers of films above and below the median). The median in this case is a better measure of central
tendency than the average as it avoids the upward skew of a small number of high budget productions.
Data for 2004 and 2005 updated since publication of the 2005/06 Yearbook.

14.4 Size distribution of budgets
The size distribution of the budgets in 2006 for the four categories of film is shown in Tables 14.5 to 14.8.
Nine features with budgets of over £30 million accounted for 75.6% of the aggregate budget for inward
features (single country). Only seven out of 25 features had budgets of less than £10 million.
Table 14.5 Size distribution of budgets, inward features (single country), 2006
NumberTotal budget inband (£ million)% oftotal budget£30 million+

9

587.0

75.6

£10–£30 million

9

150.5

19.4

Under £10 million

7

39.1

5.0

Total

25

776.6

100.0

Budget band (£ million)

Source: UK Film Council.

As Table 14.6 shows, there were only two inward feature co-productions in 2006, one with a budget in the£10–£30 million range and one with a budget of more than £30 million. For reasons of business confidentiality,
the individual budgets for these films cannot be shown.

From left
The Escapist, courtesy of Parallel Films,(Ireland), Picture Farm and Vertigo Films.
A Mighty Heart © 2007 by Paramount
Vantage, a division of Paramount
Pictures. All rights reserved.
Photo: Peter Mountain.
144 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 14.6 Size distribution of budgets, inward features (co-productions), 2006
NumberTotal budget inband (£ million)% oftotal budget£30 million+

1

–

–

£10–£30 million

1

–

–

Under £10 million

0

0.0

0.0

Total

2

103.9

100.0

Budget band (£ million)

Source: UK Film Council.
For reasons of confidentiality, the budgets of the two inward feature co-productions cannot be shown separately.

As in 2004 and 2005, there were no domestic UK features in 2006 with budgets over £30 million. Most domestic
UK features had budgets under £5 million, though the nine films in the £5-£30 million budget range accounted
for two-thirds of the combined budget.
Table 14.7 Size distribution of budgets, domestic UK features, 2006
NumberTotal budget inband (£ million)% oftotal budget£30 million+

0

0.0

0.0

£10–£30 million

5

93.4

50.5

£5–£10 million

4

29.0

15.7

£2–£5 million

13

35.1

19.0

£0.5–£2 million

28

27.6

14.9

Total

50

185.1

100.0

Budget band (£ million)

Source: UK Film Council.

Most UK co-productions were in the budget range £2–£10 million (42 out of 57) accounting for 68% of the
combined budget (Table 14.8). Compared with 2005, there was a larger number of films in the £10–£30 million
budget range, similar to the pattern in 2004 (see Statistical Yearbook 2004/05, Table 12.6, page 81).
Table 14.8 Size distribution of budgets, UK co-productions (other than inward), 2006
NumberTotal budget inband (£ million)% oftotal budget£30 million+

0

0.0

0.0

£10–£30 million

8

94.1

29.3

£5–10 million

17

131.2

40.9

£2–5 million

25

86.2

26.9

£0.5–2 million

7

9.3

2.9

Total

57

320.8

100.0

Budget band (£ million)

Source: UK Film Council.

From left
Atonement, distributedby Universal Pictures.
Hot Fuzz © 2007 Universal Studios.
All rights reserved.
14: Film production | 145

14.5 Big-budget productions, 2002–2006
The importance to UK spend of a small number of big-budget productions – most of which are inward
investment films – is demonstrated in Table 14.9. In 2006, the 10 films with budgets of £30 million or moreaccounted for 52.5% of total UK production spend.
Table 14.9 Big-budget films’ contribution to UK spend, 2002–2006
2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

5

15

8

8

10

Value of associated UK spend £ million

196.6

671.6

432.4

173.5

442.4

Total UK spend £ million

550.5

1157.7

809.7

577.0

842.4

Big-budget film share of UK spend (%)

35.7

58.0

53.4

30.1

52.5

Number of films with budgets >£30 million

Source: UK Film Council.
Data for 2004 and 2005 updated since publication of 2005/06 Yearbook.

14.6 UK share of expenditure
Table 14.10 shows the UK expenditure shares for inward investment films, inward co-productions, domestic UK
productions and co-productions (other than inward). UK domestic productions had the highest UK expenditure
share (80%), followed by inward investment films at around 65%. Co-productions (other than inward) had
the lowest UK expenditure share of 38.9%, reflecting the larger number of national partners involved in
co-productions and the requirement for balance between national investment and expenditure under the
co-production treaties.
Table 14.10 UK expenditure shares, 2006
Inward investment films (%)

64.7

Inward co-productions (%)

64.3

UK domestic productions (%)

80.0

Co-productions (other than inward) (%)

38.9

Source: UK Film Council.

14.7 UK co-productions by country of shoot
Table 14.11 shows the shoot locations for UK co-productions (not including inward investment) in 2006.
The most frequent locations were the UK (28 productions) and Ireland and Spain with eight each. Hungary (six)and the USA (five) were next, followed by Canada, France and Romania with three each. Three countries whichwere popular in 2005 (Germany, Italy and Luxembourg) figured far less in 2006.

From left
Death Defying Acts, courtesy ofLionsgate International.
Brick Lane, courtesy of The WorksMedia Group.
146 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 14.11 UK co-productions by country of shoot, 2006
Country

Number of productions

UK

28

Ireland

8

Spain

8

Hungary

6

USA

5

Canada3

France3

Romania3

Belgium2

Bulgaria

2

Czech Republic

2

Portugal

2

Russia2South Africa

2

Others17

Source: UK Film Council.
Some productions were shot in more than one country, hence the total in Table 14.11 is greater than the number of UK co-productions.

The shoot locations by region for UK co-productions shot abroad between 2004 and 2006 are shown in Table
14.12. Western Europe (not including the UK) was once again the most frequent destination. Shoots in Eastern
Europe and Russia (led by Hungary and Romania) increased for the second year in a row, after dropping in 2004.
Shoots in North America were also up (more in the USA than Canada). Elsewhere, numbers continued to berelatively small in 2006.

Right
Mr Bean’s Holiday, distributed by
Universal Pictures.
14: Film production | 147

Table 14.12 Location of shoot by region, UK co-productions shot abroad, 2004–2006
Shot abroadin 2004

Shot abroadin 2005

Shot abroadin 2006

Not available

19

2

1

Western Europe

49

48

30

North America

7

4

8

South and Central America, Caribbean

4

1

1

Eastern Europe and Russia

8

16

20

Australia and New Zealand

7

1

1

Asia

0

0

1

Africa and Indian Ocean

4

4

4

RegionSource: UK Film Council.
Of the co-productions in 2004 for which location information was not available, some may have been shot in the UK.

14.8 Production company activity levels
UK film production in 2006 was, as usual, dispersed over a large number of production companies, as shownin Table 14.13. The UK Film Council recorded 342 production companies associated with films shot in the UK
or co-productions involving the UK in 2006. Of these, 332 companies were associated with a single feature.
These were a mixture of distinct production companies and single-purpose vehicles (that is, companies set up
to make a single film). The most prolific production company was associated with six features, followed
by one with five features, two companies with three features and six with two features.
Table 14.13 Film production company activity, 2006
Number ofcompanies

Number of features per company

6

1

5

1

3

2

2

6

1

332

Total companies

342

Source: UK Film Council.
Includes all types of films involving the UK.
Films frequently have several production companies associated with them (including single purpose vehicle subsidiaries of parent companies), so the sum of thenumber of features x the number of companies is substantially greater than the total number of features involving the UK in 2006.

This is England, courtesy of
Optimum Releasing.
148 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

14.9 US studios’ involvement in inward features
US studios increased their activity in the UK in 2006. This reflected a greater degree of certainty about the
tax regime, particularly as it applied to the types of studio film suitable for making in the UK. The US majors
accounted for 11 out 27 inward features (single country and co-productions) and £360 million (63%) out
of £570 million UK spend associated with inward features (Table 14.14).
Table 14.14 US studios’ involvement in inward features and inward co-productions, 2006
Number of
inward featuresin 2006

StudioWarner Bros

3

20th Century Fox

1

Universal

2

Sony/Columbia/MGM

5

Paramount1

Total films

11

Source: UK Film Council.
Universal and Columbia collaborated on one film, hence the sum of studio involvement (12) is one greater than the number of films (11).
In addition to the films tabulated above, Universal Pictures financed four domestic UK features via its output deal with Working Title.
20th Century Fox financed two UK domestic features.

14.10 The new UK film tax incentive
2006 saw a switch from the previous UK tax incentives for film (Section 42 and Section 48) using the sale andleaseback mechanism. The new tax incentive is based on an enhanced deduction from taxable income for film
production companies that can be converted into a payable tax credit. For UK films with production budgets up
to £20 million, the value of the relief increases to a maximum of 20% of production costs where 80% or more of
the budget is spent in the UK. For UK films with production budgets of £20 million and over, the maximum value
is 16%. In addition to meeting a minimum spend test (25% of qualifying expenditure must be spent in the UK),UK films must pass a ‘cultural test’ administered by the UK Film Council and issued by the Department for
Culture Media and Sport, the emphasis of which is on the film’s story, setting, characters and contribution
to British elements.
The new incentive system received state aid approval from the European Commission on 22 November 2006 andcame into force on 1 January 2007. It applies to films starting principal photography on or after 1 January 2007.
Transitional provisions apply to UK-qualifying films that commenced principal photography before 1 January 2007
but were still uncompleted on that date.

See also:
3 Information about film companies is given
in chapter 15 (p150)
3 For details about employment in the film
production sector see chapter 17 (p166)
3 For more information about the UK film
economy see chapter 16 (p160)
3 For information on film production in the UK prior
to 1992, see the annual handbooks published by
the bfi (British Film Institute) or the bfi’s website

14: Film production | 149

“BU
ILD
ME
A
US majors,
video distributors
and exhibitors wereprominent in the
top 16 UK film
companies

French companies
were prominent acrossEurope in addition to
the US majors

15: FILM INDUSTRY COMPANIESThe number of film production companies has grown
year-on-year since 1996. Many of these companies are
small in size but there has also been expansion in the
bigger companies. The French topped the league of the
20 leading film production companies in Europe, but anumber of British companies were also prominent.
150 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

The number ofsmall production
companies
grew the mostThe numberof film production
companies grewby 256% between
1996 and 2006

STU
DIO
Only six UK
companies featured in
the top 100 European
film production
companies

French, UK, German
and Italian companies
were prominent in the
top 20 European film
production companies
in 2005
15: Film industry companies | 151

15.1 Number of companies in the film and video industries
The number of companies involved in the film and video industries has grown rapidly in the last 10 years,
particularly in the production sector where the number of companies has grown by 256%, compared with
the UK average of 19.2% (Table 15.1).
Table 15.1 Number of companies registered for VAT by industry group
Film and video
production

Film and video
distribution

Film exhibition

UK all industries

1996

1,745

355

155

1,380,695

1997

2,460

360

160

1,547,175

1998

3,065

370

160

1,573,935

1999

3,460

380

165

1,595,705

2000

3,900

425

165

1,616,835

2001

4,185

485

190

1,623,025

2002

4,605

515

195

1,619,195

2003

5,065

530

205

1,623,715

2004

5,275

455

200

1,611,535

2005

5,785

445

200

1,631,540

2006

6,210

415

200

1,646,280

Growth 1996–2006 (%)

255.9

16.9

29

19.2

Year

Source: Office for National Statistics.

Part of the growth in film and video production companies is attributable to the practice of forming single-purpose
vehicles (SPVs) for individual film productions. For tax reasons, SPVs must be kept alive legally for a number ofyears after completion of the production. Assuming every UK film involved an SPV, approximately 1,100 SPVs
would have been formed since 1996. This still leaves a net growth in film and video production companies
of more than 3,000 companies between 1996 and 2006.
15.2 Changing size distribution of film companies
The growth in the number of film and video production companies has been particularly concentrated in
the smaller turnover size bands, the opposite of the UK all-industries trend. The proportion of film andvideo production companies in the £1,000–£99,000 turnover band increased from 41% to 58% of the total(Figure 15.1), compared with a reduction from 53% to 43% for the same turnover band for UK all industries(Figure 15.2). Interestingly, there was also a significant increase in the number and proportion of large film
and video production companies. In 2006, there were 185 film and video production companies with a turnoverof £5 million or more, compared with only 45 in 1996.

152 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Figure 15.1 The changing size distribution of VAT-registered film and video production companies, 1996–2006% of total companies
60
50
40
30
20
10
1–99

0

100–999
turnover band (£000)

1,000–4,999

5,000+

1996

40.7

45.3

11.5

2.6

2006

58.2

30.8

8

3

Source: Office for National Statistics, RSU analysis.

Figure 15.2 The changing size distribution of UK VAT-registered companies (all industries), 1996–2006% of total companies
60
50
40
30
20
10
1–99

0

100–999
turnover band (£000)

1,000–4,999

5,000+

1996

52.8

40.3

5.3

1.7

2006

42.9

46.8

7.8

2.5

Source: Office for National Statistics, RSU analysis.

From left
Downfall, courtesy ofMomentum Pictures.
Perfume: Diary of a Murderer,
courtesy of Pathé Distribution.
15: Film industry companies | 153

For the film distribution and exhibition sectors (Figures 15.3 and 15.4) the growth has been in the larger turnoversize brackets, above £1 million per year.
Figure 15.3 The changing size distribution of VAT-registered film and video distribution companies,
1996–2006% of total companies
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
1–99

0

100–999
turnover band (£000)

1,000–4,999

5,000+

1996

36.6

47.9

8.5

7

2006

36.1

36.1

15.7

12

Source: Office for National Statistics, RSU analysis.

Figure 15.4 The changing size distribution of VAT-registered film exhibition companies, 1996–2006% of total companies
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
1–99

0

100–999
turnover band (£000)

1,000–4,999

5,000+

1996

25.8

64.5

6.5

3.2

2006

22.5

55

15

7.5

Source: Office for National Statistics, RSU analysis.

The Hitchhiker’s Guide to
the Galaxy, courtesy of
Buena Vista HomeEntertainment.
154 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

15.3 Leading film companies in the UK and Europe
Table 15.2 shows the top 16 film companies in the UK in 2004 as identified by the European Audiovisual
Observatory. Several interesting features stand out: the prominence of the US majors; the importance ofundertaking multiple activities (production, distribution, television, rights, video); the relatively high positionof six companies specialising in video; the presence of four exhibitors in the list; only one UK distributor(Entertainment); and the absence of any UK-owned production companies.
Table 15.2 Top 16 film companies in the UK, 2004
Company

Activities

Operatingrevenues
1000

DISFILM, DISTV, RIGHTS, VID

1,376,124

DISFILM553,402

1

Walt Disney International

2

Warner Bros Entertainment (UK)3

Terra Firma Investments (Odeon & UCI-UK)

EXH

402,454

4

Cineworld Group

EXH*397,369

5

20th Century Fox Home Entertainment

VID

372,016

6

Universal Pictures Productions

RIGHTS, DISFILM, PRODFILM

369,154

7

2 Entertain Video

VID*243,409

8

Buena Vista Home Entertainment

VID**219,135

9Sony Pictures Home Entertainment

VID

218,929

10

The Entertainment Group of Companies

DISFILM, VID*188,536

11

Paramount Home Entertainment

VID

141,466

12

VUE Cinemas (UK)

EXH

*136,267

13

Columbia Pictures Corporation

PRODFILM, DISFILM, VID

120,109

14

Warner Home Video (UK)

VID

144,113

15

National Amusements (UK)

EXH

*104,688

16

20th Century Fox Film Entertainment

DISFILM

101,774

Source: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2006 Yearbook.
*indicates 2005 revenues.
**indicates 2003 revenues.
Definitions: DISFILM = film distribution; DISTV = television distribution, RIGHTS = trade in television rights; VID = video; EXH = exhibition;
PRODFILM = film production; PRODTV = television production.

15: Film industry companies | 155

Across Europe, the US majors were prominent but were joined by four French companies, Pathé, Canal+,
Europalaces and UGC, indicating the continued corporate strength of the French film industry (Table 15.3).
Five exhibitors appeared. Terra Firma Investments (owner of Odeon and UCI) was the only non-US-owned
British-based company in the top 16.
Table 15.3 Top 16 film companies in Europe, 2005
Rank

Company1Walt Disney International

2

United International Pictures BV

3Groupe Pathé

4

Warner Bros Entertainment UK

5

Activities

Country

DISFILM, DISTV, RIGHTS, VID

Operatingrevenues
1000

UK *1,376,124

DISFILM

NL

818,424

EXH, DISFILM, VID, RIGHTS, TV, PRODFILM

FR

636,000

DISFILMUK*553,402

Embassy Eagle Holdings

PRODFILM, DISFILM

NL

552,999

6Groupe Canal+ (Cinéma)

PRODFILM, DISFILM, RIGHTS, VID

FR*394,000

7Warner Bros Entertainment GmbHDISFILMDE

434,7848Warner Bros France

DISFILMFR

413,852

9

Terra Firma Investments (Odeon & UCI)

EXH

UK

*402,454

10

Cineworld Group

EXH

UK

397,369

11

RAI Cinema

PRODFILM, RIGHTS

IT

386,794

12

Europalaces

EXH

FR

381,237

13

20th Century Fox Home Entertainment

VID

UK

*372,016

14

Universal Pictures Productions

RIGHTS, DISFILM, PRODFILM

UK*369,154

15

Egmont Nordisk Film

DISFILM, VID

SWED357,778

16

UGC

EXH, DISFILM, VID, RIGHTS, PRODFILM

FR

325,330

Source: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2006 Yearbook.
*indicates 2004 revenues.
Definitions: DISFILM = film distribution; DISTV = television distribution, RIGHTS = trade in television rights; VID = video; EXH = exhibition;
PRODFILM = film production; PRODTV = television production, TV = television.

From left
A Very Long Engagement© 2003 Productions, Warner Bros.
France, Tapioca Films and TF1
Films Production.
King Arthur, courtesy of Buena VistaHome Entertainment.
156 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

15.4 Leading film production companies in the UK and Europe
Looking at film production only, we see that eight out of the top 20 European production companies in 2005
were French, five were British and four were Italian as Table 15.4 shows. Three of the UK companies were single
or limited-purpose vehicles as was one of the French. Two long-standing UK production companies made thelist – Aardman Holdings (makers of Chicken Run and Wallace and Gromit) and the prolific UK film and televisioncompany Tiger Aspect Productions (Billy Elliot, Mr Bean). In 2005, the list was topped by Constantin Film AG of
Germany, makers of Perfume, Downfall and the three Resident Evil films (among others).
Table 15.4 Top 20 film production companies in Europe, 2005
Rank

Company

Nationality

Operatingrevenues
1000

1Constantin Film AG

DE

216,933

2

Europa Corp

FR

199,900

3

Pathé Renn ProductionFR

118,387

4

Gaumont

FR

100,232

5FilmauroIT

96,824

6

AB Svensk Filmindustri

SWED

87,4727

Films Christian FechnerFR

83,8038

Runteam Ltd (The Pianist, Oliver Twist)

UK

71,812

92003 Productions (A Very Long Engagement)FR*69,965

10

Aardman Holdings (Chicken Run, Wallace & Gromit)

UK

67,125

11

Green Hills Productions (King Arthur)UK*64,170

12

Mostly Harmless Productions (The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy)UK

63,586

13

Tiger Aspect Productions

UK

57,50414

CattleyaIT

51,32115

Tevere Film srl

IT

49,09416

Vertigo Productions

FR*45,447

17

Odeon Film AG

DE

61,27218

FidélitéFR*43,67219

UGC Images

FR

34,72320

Produzioni Alfa

IT

34,031

Source: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2006 Yearbook.
*indicates 2004 revenues.

15: Film industry companies | 157

As Table 15.5 indicates, for the UK, the picture is blurred by the frequent use of single-purpose vehicles (SPVs).
Only six non-SPV UK film companies appear in the European Audiovisual Observatory’s list of the top 100
European film production companies in 2005.
Table 15.5 Top six UK film production companies, 2005
Not including single-purpose vehicles
Rank

Company

Operatingrevenues
1000

1

Aardman Holdings

67,1252

Tiger Aspect Productions

57,504

3

Pathé Pictures (UK)*23,773

4

Lunar Films*19,3855

Scion Films*14,991

6

Working Title Films*12,752

Source: European Audiovisual Observatory, 2006 Yearbook.
*indicates 2004 revenues.
There were 24 British single-purpose or financing vehicles in the EAO’s list of the top 100 European film production companies.
EON Productions Ltd (makers of the Bond films), DNA Films (Love Actually, The Last King of Scotland, Notes on a Scandal) and Heyday Films (Harry Potter)are candidates for the list of top UK film production companies, but EAO does not have sufficient information to rank them.

While partly an artefact of the use of single-purpose vehicles, the shortness of the above list underlines thecorporately-dispersed nature of the UK film production industry.

Billy Elliot, distributed by
Universal Pictures.
158 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

See also:
3 For film production company activity levels
in 2006 see chapter 14 (p138)
3 For US studio involvement in UK film production
in 2006 see chapter 14 (p138)
3 For leading film distributors in the UK in 2006
see chapter 8 (p72)
AboveWallace & Gromit© Aardman Animations 2007.

3 For leading film exhibitors in the UK in 2006
see chapter 9 (p78)
3 For numbers and size distribution of film
workplaces in 2005 see chapter 17 (p166)
15: Film industry companies | 159

16: UK FILM EXPORTS
The UK film industry is a strong exporter, earning royalty
income from around the world, providing production
services to overseas (particularly USA) film producers
and contributing a trade surplus to the UK’s balanceof payments. The size and geographical distributionof the UK’s overseas trade in film indicates where
export opportunities are well developed and where
there may be growth.

The UK film industry
exported £967 million
worth of services in 2005.
Exports grew by 65%
between 2003 and 2005

T
U
O
B
A
K
N
I
H
“T
UK film imports largely
comprise royalties tooverseas rights’ owners

160 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

The USA was thelargest market for
UK film exports,taking 61% in 2005
The UK’s film trade
surplus grew in 2005 to£163 million, the highest
for the 11 years
under review

E
H
T

S
E
I
T
L
A
Y
O
R
Europe was the UK’s
second largest export
market at 19%

UK exports performed
better in Australia andOceania, but were
under-represented in Asia

16: UK film exports | 161

16.1 UK film exports, 1995–2005
The UK film industry exported £967 million worth of services in 2005 (the latest year for which data are available),£660 million of which came from royalties and £307 million from film production services. Compared with 2004,
exports of production services declined (reflecting the lower inward film investment in that year) while earnings
from royalties increased substantially. Film exports grew by 65% between 2003 and 2005, beating the previous
peak of 1996 as Figure 16.1 shows.
Figure 16.1 Exports of the UK film industry, 1995–2005£ millions
1,000
800
600
400
200
1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Production
services

227

202

212

154

145

210

232

222

233

444

307

Royalties

560

686

438

427

508

487

468

434

400

399

660

0

Source: Office for National Statistics (ONS).
Data for 2006 will be available in October 2007.
The export data are derived from the ONS Film and Television Survey (2005) which is a sample survey with a high response rate (83%) of companies in theInter Departmental Business Register in the Standard Industrial Classification codes relating to film and television. The above chart shows the results forfilm companies only.

16.2 UK film imports, 1995–2005
The pattern of UK film imports (Figure 16.2) is different to that of exports. The great majority of film imports areroyalties, reflecting the limited amount of offshore production services used by the UK and the need to pay
royalties for overseas films (particularly USA films) shown in the UK.
Figure 16.2 UK film imports, 1995–2005£ millions
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

Imports ofproduction
services

192

145

106

63

58

113

50

67

108

136

100

Royalties

489

507

419

374

317

497

405

403

430

616

704

0

Source: Office for National Statistics (ONS).

162 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

16.3 The UK film trade balance, 1995–2005
The film industry has made a continuous positive contribution to the UK balance of payments since 1995,
with a trade surplus (positive balance of exports over imports) in 2005 of £163 million, as Figure 16.3 shows.
Figure 16.3 Trade surplus of UK film industry, 1995–2005£ millions
300
250
200
150
100
50
0

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

106

236

125

144

278

87

245

186

95

91

163

Source: Office for National Statistics (ONS).
Trade surplus equals exports minus imports. Where a company (eg the UK subsidiary of a USA major) receives income from overseas on behalf of its
parent company and subsequently passes it on to its parent company, this is recorded both as a receipt and as a payment, leaving the measure of the trade
surplus unaffected.

16.4 UK film export markets
The USA was the largest market for UK film exports, buying 61% of total exports in 2005, as shown in
Figure 16.4. Europe was the second largest market, buying 19.3%. Compared with 2004, the share for the
USA increased substantially, while that of Europe dropped. The high USA proportion reflects the fact that the US
market is the largest film market in the world and generates large revenues for UK films and that US studios makeextensive use of UK production facilities. Although 2005 was a lower year for export of production services, it wasan excellent year for UK films (which had a US market share of 16%) and royalties would also have been earnedon all UK-owned library titles distributed or shown in the USA in 2005.
Figure 16.4 Destination of UK film exports as percentage of the total, 2005
Other Europe 2.0
Asia 2.5
France 2.8
Germany 1.7
Other EU 12.8
Africa 1.4

USA 61.0

Australia/
Oceania 15.4

Other America 0.5

Source: Office for National Statistics (ONS).

16: UK film exports | 163

16.5 UK film exports compared with the global market for filmed entertainment
A useful comparison can be made between UK film export shares and the geographical distribution of the
global market for filmed entertainment (Figure 16.5). The differences that stand out are the much higher
proportion of UK exports to Australia and Oceania (15.4%) compared with those countries’ share of the global
market for filmed entertainment (2.6%) and the much lower proportion of UK exports to Asia (2.5%) comparedwith the Asian countries’ share of the global market (19.7%). This suggests that UK film exports to Asia may still
be under-developed.
In Figure 16.5 there is also a significant difference in the USA and ’other America’ shares, but this may reflect
the accidental inclusion of exports to Canada in UK exports to the USA as the USA and Canada are a single
distribution territory. The high USA percentage also reflects UK exports of production services to the USA,as pointed out in 16.4.
Figure 16.5 UK export shares compared with the global market for filmed entertainment, 2005
% share
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
FranceGermany

Italy

Other EU

Share of UK
film exports

2.8

1.7

0.0

Share ofglobal filmed
entertainment
market

3.8

4.2

2.8

0

12.8

Other
Europe
2.0

9.0

1.6

USA

Africa

Asia

61.0

Other
America
0.5

1.4

2.5

Australia
and Oceana
15.4

46.6

9.2

0.5

19.7

2.6

Sources: UK exports: ONS. Global market: PricewaterhouseCoopers.
Total global market for filmed entertainment does not include the UK, to keep the figures comparable with the UK’s export figures.

From left
Casino Royale © 2006 Danjaq,
LLC and United Artists Corporation
and Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc.
All rights reserved.
Apocalypto.
164 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

16.6 The geographical distribution of the UK’s film trade surplus
The geographical distribution of the UK’s film trade surplus was different from the export pattern, as shown in
Table 16.1. In 2005, the UK’s film trade with the USA was in balance and the main contributors to the overall film
trade surplus were France (£12 million), non-EU Europe (£9 million), Asia (£22 million) and Australia and Oceania(£129 million). This reflects the stronger performance of UK films around the world than of overseas films (otherthan from the USA) in the UK market.
Table 16.1 International transactions of the UK film industry by geographical area, 2005
Exports£ million

Imports£ million

Balance£ million

Exports%

Imports%

Balance%

France

27

15

12

2.8

1.9

7.3

Germany

16

12

4

1.7

1.5

2.4

Italy

–

–

–

–

–

–

Other EU

124

137

–13

12.8

17.1

–7.9

Other Europe

19

10

9

2.0

1.2

5.5

USA

590

588

2

61.0

73.2

1.2

Other America

5

3

2

0.5

0.4

1.2

Africa

14

16

–2

1.4

2.0

–1.2

Asia

24

2

22

2.5

0.2

13.3

Australia & Oceania

149

20

129

15.4

2.5

78.2

World total

968

803

165

100.0

100.0

100.0

See also:
3 For more information on the UK and global film
market see chapter 13 (p130)
3 For more information on the performanceof UK films internationally see chapter 4 (p32)
3 For more information on inward investment
in film production in the UK see chapter 14(p138)

16: UK film exports | 165

17: EMPLOYMENT IN THE FILM AND VIDEO INDUSTRIESThe film and video industries employ substantial
numbers of highly skilled workers. While employment
levels are somewhat volatile, reflecting the variable levelof demand for the sector’s services, employment has
increased by a third over the past decade.

42,230 people
worked in film andvideo including 24,213
The film and video
working in film and workforce
was 33%higher in 2006 than invideo production, 1994,
compared with a
13% increase in thea decrease on
overall workforce
2005

“D

166 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

N
A
W
U
O
OY

O
T
T

People fromminority ethnic groups
are under-represented
in film production,
at 5% unchanged
since 2002

48% of people
in film and video
production were
freelance

KROW
76% ofthose working in
production and 68%
in distribution are in
London and thesouth-east

58% ofemployees in film
and video production
were in workplaces
with ten or fewer
people

?
M
L
I
F
IN
Women made up
40% of the film
production workforce
in 2006 (33% in 2002)
and they were paidless than men
on average

17: Employment in the film and video industries | 167

17.1 The workforce
According to the Labour Force Survey, a total of 42,230 people worked in the film and video production,and distribution and film exhibition sectors in the year 2006 (October 2005 to September 2006; in autumn
2005 seasonal quarters were replaced by calendar quarters in the Labour Force Survey). Table 17.1 shows
the breakdown.
Table 17.1 Film and video industry workforce, 2006
SIC

Number in
employment

Film and video production

9211

24,213

Film and video distribution

9212

2,816

Film exhibition

9213

15,201

SectorTotal

42,230Source: Labour Force Survey, Office for National Statistics.
Notes:
SIC = Standard Industrial Classification.
ONS does not separate video production and distribution from film production and distribution.

The 2006 figure was slightly lower than 2005, reflecting lower reported employment figures in the film and video
production and distribution sectors. Overall, the film and video industry workforce was 33% larger in 2006 than in
1994, against an increase in the overall UK workforce of 13% over the same period. Figure 17.1 shows the growthof the three film-related sectors.
Employment in the film production sector has continued to shrink since the peak of 2001, despite the fact that
UK production spend (see Figure 14.2) has been higher on average since 2003 than it was in 2001 and 2002.
Distribution is fairly constant, while exhibition has been on a fluctuating upward trend. The exhibition sector
had been given a lift after the sharp fall recorded in 2005.
Figure 17.1 Size of film and video workforce, 1994–-2006
Number in Employment
35,00030,00025,00020,00015,00010,000
5,000
1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

24,00625,235

21,45423,502

31,93328,60628,88024,81624,93624,213

11,623

15,037

16,494

12,054

11,952

15,225

19,77920,03914,351

15,201

3,750

2,448

4,219

3,586

4,605

4,827

2,558

3,142

2,816

Film andvideo production

19,54521,993

17,959Film exhibition

8,746

10,524

10,301

Film andvideo distribution

3,507

4,435

3,124

3,978

Source: Labour Force Survey, Office for National Statistics.
The employment figures from 1994–2005 were averages of four seasonal quarters (winter, spring, summer and autumn), formerly known
as ‘autumn years’. From 2006, the figures are averages of the four ‘calendar quarters’ (Oct–Dec, Jan–Mar, Apr–Jun and Jul–Sep), referred to as ‘year to
September’, instead. This change is a Eurostat requirement, namely that all countries in the EU have a Labour Force Survey based on
calendar quarters.

Most people working in the film distribution and exhibition sectors were employees, but the film production
sector had a higher proportion of freelance workers. In 2006, 48% of those engaged in film and video production(SIC 9211), a total of 11,716 people, were self-employed and some 2% were classified as ‘unpaid family workers’(Table 17.2 and Figure 17.2). An ‘unpaid family worker’ is defined as a person who is doing unpaid work for abusiness that they own or that a relative owns.
168 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 17.2 Film and video production workforce (SIC 9211), 1994–2006
Self-employed

Self-employed
as % of total

Unpaidfamily worker

Unpaid family
worker as% of total

19,545

8,988

46.0

635

3.2

1995

21,993

10,779

49.0

218

1.0

1996

17,959

7,387

41.1

215

1.2

1997

24,006

9,855

41.1

494

2.1

1998

25,235

12,762

50.6

0

0.0

1999

21,454

10,624

49.5

396

1.8

2000

23,502

10,129

43.1

103

0.4

2001

31,933

12,766

40.0

723

2.3

2002

28,606

13,469

47.1

275

1.0

2003

28,88015,347

53.1

102

0.4

2004

24,816

11,863

47.8

230

0.9

2005

24,936

9,718

39.0

989

4.0

2006

24,213

11,716

48.4

518

2.1

Total in
employment

1994

Source: Labour Force Survey, Office for National Statistics.
1994 to 2005 were autumn years whereas 2006 was the year to September.
See footnote to Figure 17.1 for explanation.

The proportion of self-employed has fluctuated in the 40–50% band since 1994. In comparison, the self-employedpercentage of the total UK workforce is around 13%.
Figure 17.2 Self-employed and unpaid family workers as proportions of total workforce, film and video
production (SCI 9211), 1994–2006% total in employment
60
50
40
30
20
10
1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Self-employed
as % of total

46.0

49.0

41.1

41.1

50.6

49.5

43.1

40.0

47.1

53.1

47.8

39.0

48.4

Unpaid family
worker as % of total

3.2

1.0

1.2

2.1

0.0

1.8

0.4

2.3

1.0

0.4

0.9

4.0

2.1

Source: Labour Force Survey, Office for National Statistics.
1994 to 2005 were autumn years whereas 2006 was the year to September.
See footnote to Figure 17.1 for explanation.

17: Employment in the film and video industries | 169

17.2 The film production workforce survey
Skillset and the UK Film Council have built on the first survey of people in film production carried out in 2004 witha further survey of the sector. Conducted during 2006, the research identifies trends in employment and skills
development within the production sector of the industry. Here we report some of the preliminary findings of thedemographics, work patterns and incomes, and compare them with those from the first survey whose reference
year was 2002. The full report will be available in summer 2007.
Two-fifths of the survey respondents were women, with the female percentage varying widely by occupationgroup, from 85% in make-up and hairdressing to 3% in construction, as Table 17.3 shows. There appears tobe some variation in the gender profiles between the two surveys. There were more female assistant directors(38%) but fewer women working in the editing, post-production and visual effects occupations (26%) this year.
Of the respondents in the sound/electrical occupations, 4% were women compared to zero in 2002.
Table 17.3 Occupational group by gender, film production workforce, 2002 and 2006
Respondents 2002
Occupational group

Respondents 2006

Male %

Female %Male %

Female %Production/script development

34

66

36

64

Assistant directors

74

26

62

38

Art/set decorating/props

68

32

55

45

Camera

91

9

85

15

Sound/electrical

100

–

96

4

Costume

30

70

20

80

Make-up/hairdressing

12

88

15

85

Editing/post-production/visual effects

58

42

74

26

Construction

95

5

97

3

Locations

76

24

78

23

Others

70

30

65

35

All occupations

67

33

61

39

Source: Skillset.
The percentages for male and female in some occupational groups do not add up to 100% due to rounding.

The challenge of reflecting the UK’s ethnic diversity in the film production industry is evident in Tables 17.4 and17.5. The ethnic profile of the respondents in 2006 was identical to that in the previous survey. Overall only 5%of the film workforce was from minority groups, below the national all-sectors average of 7% and well below theLondon workforce average of 24% which is a relevant comparator for the film industry in view of the industry’s
concentration in London.
Table 17.4 Ethnicity of UK film production workforce, 2002 and 2006
Respondents
2002%

Respondents
2006%

All UK
workforce(LFS, 2004)
%

White

95

95

93

Mixed

2

2

1

Asian or Asian British

1

1

3

Black or black British

1

1

2

Chinese

–

–

0

Other

1

1

1

Ethnic group

Source: Skillset; Office for National Statistics Labour Force Survey, quarterly supplement 2004.
170 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Table 17.5 Ethnicity of London film production workforce, 2002 and 2006
Londonrespondents
2002%

Londonrespondents
2006%

All UK
workforce(LFS, 2004)
%

White

94

93

76

Mixed

3

2

1

Asian or Asian British

1

1

11

Black or black British

1

1

8

Chinese

–

1

1

Other

1

2

3

Ethnic group

Source: Skillset; Office for National Statistics Labour Force Survey, quarterly supplement 2004.

The disabled proportion of the film production workforce increased slightly from 2% to 3%, as shownin Table 17.6.
Table 17.6 Disability, film production workforce, 2002 and 2006
Respondents
2002%

Respondents
2006%

All UK
workforce(LFS, 2005)
%

Yes

2

3

5

No

98

97

95

Workers who consider themselves to have a disability

Source: Skillset; Office of National Statistics Labour Force Survey, quarterly supplement 2005.

The age profile of the respondents in 2006 was somewhat more youthful than in the previous survey. The film
production workforce was predominantly young, with 84% aged 49 or under as Table 17.7 shows. The female
age profile was significantly younger than the male, with 90% of women being under the age of 49.
More of the respondents in 2006 were between 16 and 24 years (8% compared with 3% in 2002). People in film
production appeared younger than in the wider workforce with more than a third falling into the 25 to 34 year
age band in comparison with a fifth of the UK workforce as a whole. The increase in the female percentage inthe 16–24 and 25–34 age groups is consistent with the slight growth overall in the female percentage of theworkforce, suggesting increased entry of younger women into film production.
Table 17.7 Age distribution of film production workforce, 2002 and 2006

Male %

Female %All %Male %

Female %All %All UK
workforce(LFS, 2005)
All %

16–24

3

4

3

7

9

8

16

25–34

26

41

31

27

44

34

22

35–49

46

42

45

46

37

42

37

50+

25

13

21

21

10

17

25

All ages

100

100

100

100

100

100

100

Respondents
2002
Age group

Respondents
2006

Source: Skillset; Office for National Statistics Labour Force Survey, quarterly supplement 2005.

17: Employment in the film and video industries | 171

As Table 17.8 shows, slightly fewer respondents were married or living as a couple this year than in 2002
(57% compared with 61%). In addition more were single (38% compared with 32%).
Table 17.8 Marital status of film production workforce, 2002 and 2006
Respondents
2002%

Respondents
2006%

Married or living as couple

61

57

Single and never married

32

38

Divorced or separated

7

6

Widowed––Marital status

Source: Skillset.

Just over a quarter (27%) of respondents reported living with at least one dependent child under 16 years which
was a slight drop in comparison with the third in 2002 (Table 17.9). As in 2002 however, the proportion of male
respondents living with dependent children was considerably greater than the proportion of female respondents(36% compared with 14%).
Table 17.9 Family status of film production workforce, 2002 and 2006
Respondents 2002

Living with dependent children under 16

Respondents 2006

Male %

Female %All %Male %

Female %

All %

39

21

33

36

14

27

Source: Skillset.

From left
NFTS, a Skillset Screen Academy.
172 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

All respondents were asked to indicate the total gross income they had received from feature film work during
the 12 months preceding the survey. Table 17.10 shows that, in 2006, one in 10 (9%) had earned £75,000 or
more and the same percentage (9%) had received between £50,000 and £74,999. By far the most common range
of income from feature film work reported however was under £20,000 and this was the experience of almost
half (47%) the respondents. In 2002 as many as one in 10 respondents (10%) reported that they had not received
any income from feature film work, and this improved to just 2% of the 2006 respondents.
Table 17.10 Distribution of gross income from feature film work, 2002 and 2006
Respondents 2002

Respondents 2006

Male %

Female %All %Male %

Female %All %No income from featurefilm work in past year

8

14

10

2

2

2

£1–£19,999

31

45

36

45

50

47

£20,000–£29,999

15

11

14

13

14

13

£30,000–£39,999

15

10

13

12

14

13

£40,000–£49,999

11

8

9

9

6

8

£50,000–£74,999

11

10

11

11

7

9

£75,000 or more

9

3

7

9

7

9

100

100

100

100

100

100

Source: Skillset.

Slightly more male than female respondents fell into higher income brackets with a fifth (20%) of male
respondents earning £50,000 or more in comparison with 14% of the women. On the whole however, genderdifferences in feature film incomes appear to have reduced since the 2004 survey, with women becoming
relatively more numerous in the £20,000–£39,999 and £75,000+ bands. The proportion of very low-paid men(under £20,000) increased between 2002 and 2006.

Skillset Screen Academy at London
College of Communications (LLC)& Ealing Institute of Media (EIM).
17: Employment in the film and video industries | 173

Table 17.11 shows the distribution of weekly rates paid for feature film work. As in 2002 women tended
to report lower weekly rates than men. For example a third of the female respondents in 2006 received under£800 per week in comparison with a fifth (21%) of male respondents, while a fifth (21%) received the higher
rate of £1,400 per week or more in comparison with a third (33%) of male respondents.
Table 17.11 Weekly rates for feature film work, 2002 and 2006
Respondents 2002
Weekly rate

Respondents 2006

Male %

Female %All %Male %

Female %All %Less than £400 per week

4

7

5

9

12

10

£400–£599 per week

4

6

5

6

11

8

£600–£799 per week

6

15

9

6

10

8

£800–£999 per week

16

13

15

16

15

16

£1,000–£1,199 per week

15

15

15

17

17

17

£1,200–£1,399 per week

11

14

12

13

15

14

£1,400–£1,599 per week

14

11

13

11

7

9

£1,600–£1,799 per week

6

4

5

5

4

5

£1,800 or more per week

24

14

21

17

10

14

Source: Skillset.
The high weekly rates paid to most people in the industry reflect, among other things, the long working hours involved in film production. A working week
typically consists of six days, with an average day of 11 hours.

More results from the feature film production workforce survey will be available in the full report of the survey
due to be published in summer 2007 (see www.skillset.org).
17.3 The workplace location
The film production and distribution sectors are concentrated in London and the South East, as shown in Table
17.12. In contrast, the London and South East share of the exhibition sector workforce is closer to the UK average.
Table 17.12 London and South East employment as percentage of total, 2006
London andSouth East
as % of
UK total

Sector

SIC

Total UK
employment

London andSouth East
employment

UK all industries

All 28,308,801

7,605,938

26.9

Film and video production

9211

24,213

18,39776.0

Film and video distribution

9212

2,816

1,924

68.3

Film exhibition

9213

15,201

4,414

29.0

Source: Labour Force Survey, Office for National Statistics. The South East region wraps around London to include the major studios to the west of London.
Figures shown in this table are averages of the four calendar quarters from October 2005 to September 2006.

The London and South East share of the film and video production workforce (SIC 9211) was 76% in the year to
September 2006, closer to its long-term average than the low 2004 figures of 50.7% which may have been due
to statistical error arising from the small size of the Labour Force Survey at industry sub-sector level. Figure 17.3
suggests that the share of the film and video production workforce in London and the South East is reverting to
the higher level of the late 1990s.

174 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Figure 17.3 London and South East percentage share of total workforce, 1994-2006
London and South East
% share of total workforce
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
1994

1995

1996

Film andvideo production (%) 57.3

61.8

67.8

79.0

78.1

69.7

78.2

70.6

65.2

73.2

50.7

69.7

76.0

26.5

26.1

26.2

26.4

26.6

27.0

26.9

27.0

27.0

26.7

26.6

26.7

26.9

UK all industries (%)

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Source: Labour Force Survey, Office for National Statistics.
1994 to 2005 were autumn years whereas 2006 was the year to September.
See footnote to Figure 17.1 for explanation.

The peaks and troughs in the London and South East share of the film and video production workforce appear
to coincide with the peaks and troughs in film production in the UK (see Figure 14.2 page •). This suggests
the variability in UK film production is absorbed more by London and the South East than by other nations
and regions in the UK.
17.4 The scale of the workplace
Each year, the Office for National Statistics conducts a survey of businesses, called the Annual Business Inquiry(ABI), which provides information on the number of employees in each workplace, by industrial sector. The latest
available data are for 2005 and those relating to the film industry are shown in Tables 17.13, 17.14 and 17.15.
The different characteristics of the three sectors stand out clearly in these tables.
The film and video production sector had a very high number of small workplaces (97.1% in the 1–10 band),accounting for a majority of the sector’s total workforce (58.2%). At the other end of the scale, there was a small
number of large workplaces. The 41 workplaces with 50 or more employees accounted for 5,146 employees,
an average of 126 each.
Table 17.13 Film and video production (SIC 9211) workplace size distribution (employees), 2005
Number ofworkplaces
in band% totalworkplaces

Number of
employees
in band% totalemployees

1–10

6,967

97.1

11,818

58.2

11–49

168

2.3

3,343

16.5

50+

41

0.6

5,146

25.3

Total

7,176

100.0

20,307100.0

Workplace size band

Source: ABI, Office for National Statistics.

The distribution sector was not as concentrated in small workplaces as the production sector, with three-quartersof employees working in workplaces with 11 or more employees.

17: Employment in the film and video industries | 175

Table 17.14 Film and video distribution (SIC 9212) workplace size distribution (employees), 2005
Number ofworkplaces
in band% totalworkplaces

Number of
employees
in band% totalemployees

1–10

445

89.7

1,178

25.5

11+

51

10.3

3,444

74.5

Total

496

100.0

4,622

100.0

Workplace size band

Source: ABI, Office for National Statistics.

Workplace numbers for bands above 11 employees cannot be published for confidentiality reasons (too few
workplaces in the bands). 59% of distribution employees worked in workplaces of 50 employees or more.
There was a small number of workplaces in the 200–plus employee size range.
The exhibition sector had a concentration that was the reverse of the production sector with 57% of employees
in workplaces of 50 or more, and only 4% in workplaces in the 1–10 employee band.
Table 17.15 Film exhibition (SIC 9213) workplace size distribution (employees), 2005
Number ofworkplaces
in band% totalworkplaces

Number of
employees
in band% totalemployees

1–10

180

31.5

650

3.6

11–49

241

42.2

7,126

39.8

50+

150

26.3

10,122

56.6

Total

571

100.0

17,898100.0

Workplace size band

Source: ABI, Office for National Statistics.

The declining trend in the proportion of employment in workplaces with 50 or more employees in the film
and video production sector (SIC 9211) in the early part of the last decade has been reversed in recent years.
In contrast the rapid growth in the proportion of employment in workplaces with 1–10 employees from 1995
has slowed and reached a level of just below 60% of the sector as a whole in 2005

176 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

Figure 17.4 Film and video production sector (SIC 9211) employees by workplace size band,percentage of total, 1995–2005% of sector workforce
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

1–10 employees (%)

44.9

46.9

50.3

55.6

57.2

57.9

56.4

57.2

55.4

58.4

58.2

50+ employees (%)

30.0

28.3

25.7

25.6

21.3

22.9

18.2

17.3

24.9

21.4

25.3

Source: ABI, Office for National Statistics.

In the exhibition sector, the proportion of employees in the 50–plus category has been increasing gradually overthe last decade, while the proportion in the 11–49 category has been falling, as shown in Figure 17.5. This reflectsa growth in the number of larger units.
Figure 17.5 Film exhibition sector (SIC 9213) employees by workplace size band,percentage of total, 1995–2005% of sector workforce
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

11–49 employees (%) 63.1

56.8

40.5

25.1

36.6

51.8

36.1

34.2

41.7

32.1

39.8

29.8

35.4

52.1

68.0

56.1

42.2

59.3

61.8

54.1

63.9

56.6

50+ employees (%)

Source: ABI, Office for National Statistics.

See also:
3 For more details on the film distribution sector
in 2006 see chapter 8 (p72)
3 For more information about the exhibition sector
in 2006 see chapter 9 (p78)
3 For more background on film production in 2006
see chapter 14 (p138)
From left
NFTS, a Skillset Screen Academy.
17: Employment in the film and video industries | 177

Glossary
Asian programming
Films originating from South Asia, for example
Bollywood, and generally, though not exclusively,
aimed at a South Asian audience and in a South
Asian language
BAFTA
British Academy of Film and Television Arts
BARB
Broadcasters’ Audience Research Board Ltd.
The company that compiles audience figures
for UK television (www.barb.co.uk)
BBFC
British Board of Film Classification.
Independent body responsible for classifying films
and video (see Film certificate) (www.bbfc.org.uk)
Box officeTotal value of ticket sales for a film screened
commercially at cinemas
Box office grossBox office takings before deduction of
Value Added Tax (VAT)
BVA
British Video Association. The trade body representing
the interests of publishers and rights owners of
pre-recorded home entertainment on video(www.bva.org.uk)
CAA
Cinema Advertising Association. The trade associationof cinema advertising contractors operating in the
UK and Eire
Concession revenue
Revenue from sales of food, drink and merchandiseat cinemas
Co-production
A film made by companies from more than
one country, often under the terms of a bilateral
co-production treaty or the European Convention
on Cinematographic Co-Production
Country of origin
The nationality of a film. In the case of co-productions,this may include more than one country

DCMS
Department for Culture, Media and Sport. The UK Film
Council’s sponsoring department
Digital Cinema Initiatives
Digital Cinema Initiatives, LLC (DCI) was created in
March 2002 and is a joint venture of Disney, Fox,
Paramount, Sony Pictures, Universal and Warner Bros.
DCI’s primary purpose is to establish and document
voluntary specifications for an open architecture for
digital cinema that ensures a uniform and high levelof technical performance, reliability and quality control(www.dcimovies.com)
DLP Cinema
DLP Cinema is the trademark of Texas Instruments’digital projection system. ’DLP‘ stands for ’digital
light processing’
Digital projection
The projection of a film onto a cinema screen using
a digital master and a digital projector, that is using
electronic signals to direct light onto the screen rather
than passing light through a celluloid strip
Distributor
A person or company that acquires the right to exploit
the commercial and creative values of a film in thetheatrical, video and TV market. Also conducts thepromotional and marketing activities necessary to
attract audiences to the film
DVD
Digital versatile disc
Exhibitor
A cinema operator that rents a film from a distributor
to show to a cinema audience
Feature film
A film made for cinema release, as opposed
to a film made for television, and usually of atleast 80 minutes duration
Film certificate
Classification given to a film by the British Boardof Film Classification. Indicates the film’s suitability
for audiences according to their age
Film rental
The sum of money paid to the distributor by theexhibitor in return for the right to show a particularfilm. Usually calculated as a percentage of net
box officeFranchise
A film series such as Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s
Stone, The Lord of the Rings, or the James Bond films

178 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook

GenreA style or category of film defined on the basis ofcommon story and cinematic conventions (for example
action, crime, romantic comedy, drama, etc)
Government office regions
Classification of English regions used to establish theboundaries of the Regional Development Agencies andthe Regional Screen Agencies
Inward features
A term used by the UK Film Council to denote a film
where more than 50% of the total financing is fromoutside the UK and where the production is attracted
to the UK by the UK’s filmmaking infrastructure
or locations
ISBA TV regions
System for classifying regions developed by the
Incorporated Society of British Advertisers for use
by the advertising industry
Mainstream programming
Category of films aimed at the general audience
Megaplex site
Defined by Dodona Research as a purpose-built
cinema with 20 or more screensMultiplex site
Dodona Research defines a multiplex as a purposebuilt cinema with five or more screens
Net box office
Box office takings after deduction of VAT
Multi-channel television
Digital television programming carried by satellite,
cable or freeview delivery systems, in this case
excluding the five main network channels (BBC1,
BBC2, ITV1, Channel 4 and Five)
Online rental
Selecting and renting DVDs via a website forpostal delivery

Pay-per-view
A system in which television viewers purchaseindividual films to view. The film is shown at the sametime to everyone ordering it, as opposed to video on
demand, which allows the viewers to see the film at
any time. Films can be purchased via on-screen guide,
automated telephone or customer services line
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
A numbering system used by the Office for National
Statistics to identify different industries in the UK’s
official statistics
Sites
Individual cinema premises
Socio-economic group
Section of the population defined by
employment status
Specialised programming
Generally, non-mainstream films. This category
includes foreign-language and sub-titled films,
art-house productions and films aimed atniche audiences
Terrestrial television
The five main analogue free-to-air channels:
BBC1, BBC2, ITV1, Channel 4 and Five
Traditional cinema
A cinema generally with fewer than five screens andthat shows more mainstream product. Often an older
building located in city centres or suburbs
Video on Demand (VOD)
A VOD system allows users to select and watch films
at the time they want over a network as part of aninteractive television system. VOD systems enable theuser to download films to own or rent before viewing
starts or to stream content to be viewed in real time

ONS
Office for National Statistics
Out of town cinema
Cinema located on the outskirts of a town, typicallyin a large shopping development

Glossary | 179

Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the following organisationsfor kindly allowing us to reproduce their data:
Attentional Ltd (formerly David Graham and Associates(DGA) Ltd)
Broadcasters’ Audience Research Board Ltd (BARB)
British Board of Film Classification (BBFC)
British Federation of Film Societies (BFFS)
British Market Research Bureau (BMRB)
British Video Association (BVA)
Cinema Advertising Association (CAA)
Department for Culture Media and Sport (DCMS)
Dodona Research
European Audiovisual Observatory (EAO)
Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA)
MRIB
Nielsen EDI
Nielsen Media Research
Office for National Statistics (ONS)
Official UK Charts Company
PricewaterhouseCoopers
Screen Digest
Skillset
TNS
Please note that nothing in this Yearbook may
be reproduced in any form without prior permission
from the authors or copyright owners.
Sources
Chapters 1 to 10: Films, audiences and talent• Nielsen EDI, weekly UK box office reports• Nielsen EDI, weekly US box office reports• Independent Film and Television Alliance (IFTA),
international box office reports• Cinetel (Italy), box office reports• Kogyo Tsushinsha (Japan), box office reports• Motion Picture Association of America,
US admissions report• European Audiovisual Observatory Lumiere
Database• Department for Culture, Media and Sport, list of
UK qualifying films• Dodona Research, Cinema-going 16, March 2007180 | UK Film Council Statistical Yearbook• Screen Digest, digital screen numbers• British Board of Film Classification (BBFC), databaseof film classifications• British Federation of Film Societies, Cinema for
All membership survey, 2006
• Nielsen Media Research, monthly media
spend reports• Cinema Advertising Association, Cinema and Video
Industry Audience Research (CAVIAR) survey,
2006 Quarterly Reports and FAME: Film Audience
Measurement and Evaluation, December 2006
• TNS, Disability and ethnicity groups within visualentertainments, 52 weeks ending 7 January 2007
• Variety, Top Worldwide Grossers 2006,
15–21 January 2007
Chapters 11 and 12: Films on video/DVD andtelevision• British Video Association, BVA Yearbook 2007
• MRIB, Rental Monitor weekly report• Official UK Charts Company, video charts• Broadcasters’ Audience Research Board, Television
Audience Measurement Service• Attentional Ltd (formerly David Graham
and Associates Ltd), database of film on UK
television, 2006
Chapters 13 to 17: The UK film industry
and UK film workforce
Sources from previous chapters, plus:• PricewaterhouseCoopers, Global Entertainment
and Media Outlook 2006–2010, 2006
• IPSOS & BVA film theft research group, Digital andPhysical Piracy in GB, Wave 4, November 2006,
March 2007
• European Audiovisual Observatory, 2006 Yearbook,
Volume 3• Office for National Statistics, Annual Business
Inquiry, 2005
• Office for National Statistics, Labour Force Survey,
Quarterly to September 2006
• Office for National Statistics, 2005 Film andTelevision Survey, October 2006
• Office for National Statistics, Size Analysisof UK Businesses 2005 (VAT data)• Skillset, Film production workforce survey,
March 2007

Acknowledgements

The UK Film Council is the Government-backed leadagency for film in the UK ensuring that the economic,
cultural and educational aspects of film are effectively
represented at home and abroad. Our goal is to help
make the UK a global hub for film in the digital age,with the world’s most imaginative, diverse and vibrantfilm culture, underpinned by a flourishing, competitive
film industry.
We invest Government Grant-in-aid and Lottery money
in developing new filmmakers, in funding exciting new
British films and in getting a wider choice of films toaudiences throughout the UK. We also invest in
training, promoting Britain as an internationalfilmmaking location and in raising the profile ofBritish films abroad.
We aim to deliver lasting benefits to the industry andthe public through:Creativity – encouraging the development of newtalent, skills, and creative and technological innovationin UK film and assisting new and establishedfilmmakers to produce successful and distinctive
British films;
Enterprise – supporting the creation and growth ofsustainable businesses in the film sector, providing
access to finance and helping the UK film industry
compete successfully in the domestic and global
marketplace;
Imagination – promoting education and an
appreciation and enjoyment of cinema by giving UK
audiences access to the widest range of UK andinternational cinema, and by supporting film culture
and heritage.
We want to ensure there are no barriers to accessing
our printed materials. If you, or someone you know,
would like a large print, Braille, disc or audiotape
version of this report, please contact our
Communications Department at the following address:
UK Film Council
10 Little Portland Street
London W1W 7JG
T +44 (0)20 7861 7861
F +44 (0)20 7861 7863
info@ukfilmcouncil.org.uk
www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk

Designed and produced by Radley Yeldar (London)

UK FILM COUNCIL

UK Film Council
10 Little Portland Street
London W1W 7JG
T +44 (0)20 7861 7861
F +44 (0)20 7861 7862
This Statistical Yearbook
is available online atwww.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk

WRAP”

STATISTICAL YEARBOOK 2006/07“IT’S ASTATISTICAL YEARBOOK
2006/07“AND

ACTION”